Trump says he is open to regime change in Iran
'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change???' Mr Trump posted on social media. 'MIGA!!!'
The posting on Truth Social marked something of a reversal from defence secretary Pete Hegseth's Sunday morning news conference that detailed the aerial bombing on three of the country's nuclear sites.
'This mission was not and has not been about regime change,' Mr Hegseth said.
"The damage to the Nuclear sites in Iran is said to be 'monumental.' The hits were hard and accurate. Great skill was shown by our military. Thank you!" –President Donald J. Trump pic.twitter.com/BJQPHa7XT6
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) June 22, 2025
Secretary of state Marco Rubio warned on Fox News that any retaliation against the US or a rush toward building a nuclear weapon would 'put the regime at risk'.
Mr Trump's warning to Iran's leadership comes as the US has demanded that Iran not respond to the bombardment of the heart of a nuclear programme it spent decades developing.
The Trump administration has made a series of intimidating statements even as it has simultaneously called to restart negotiations, making it hard to get a complete read on whether the president is simply taunting an adversary or using inflammatory words that could further widen the war between Israel and Iran that began earlier this month.
Up until the president's post on Sunday afternoon, the coordinated messaging by Mr Trump's vice president, Pentagon chief, top military adviser and secretary of state suggested a confidence that any fallout would be manageable and that Iran's lack of military capabilities would ultimately force it back to the bargaining table.
Mr Hegseth had said that America 'does not seek war' with Iran, while Vice President JD Vance said the strikes have given Tehran the possibility of returning to negotiate with Washington.
But the unfolding situation is not entirely under Washington's control, as Tehran has a series of levers to respond to the aerial bombings, which could intensify the conflict in the Middle East with possible global repercussions.
Iran can block oil being shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, attack US bases in the region, engage in cyber attacks or double down on a nuclear programme might seem like more of a necessity after the US strike.
Mr Trump, who had addressed the nation from the White House on Saturday night, returned to social media on Sunday to lambast Republican Congress member Thomas Massie, who had objected to the president taking military action without specific congressional approval.
'We had a spectacular military success yesterday, taking the 'bomb' right out of their hands (and they would use it if they could!)' Mr Trump said as part of the post on Truth Social.
At their joint Pentagon briefing, Mr Hegseth and Air Force General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said 'Operation Midnight Hammer' involved decoys and deception, and met with no Iranian resistance.
General Caine indicated that the goal of the operation — destroying nuclear sites in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan — had been achieved.
'Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,' he said.
While US officials urged caution and stressed that only nuclear sites were targeted by Washington, Iran criticised the actions as a violation of its sovereignty and international law.
Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said Washington was 'fully responsible' for whatever actions Tehran may take in response.
'They crossed a very big red line by attacking nuclear facilities,' he said at a news conference in Turkey. 'I don't know how much room is left for diplomacy.'
China and Russia, where Araghchi was heading for talks with President Vladimir Putin, condemned the US military action. The attacks were 'a gross violation of international law,' said Russia's Foreign Ministry, which also advocated 'returning the situation to a political and diplomatic course.'
A Turkish Foreign Ministry statement warned about the risk of the conflict spreading to 'a global level'.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the United Kingdom was moving military equipment into the area to protect its interests, people and allies.
His office said he talked on Sunday with Mr Trump about the need for Tehran to resume negotiations, but Mr Trump would have posted his remarks about regime change after their conversation.
The leaders of Italy, Canada, Germany and France agreed on the need for 'a rapid resumption of negotiations.' France's Emmanuel Macron held talks with the Saudi Crown Prince and the Sultan of Oman.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Iran told shutting down oil 'choke point' would be 'economic suicide'
The US has warned Iran that closing the Strait of Hormuz in response to American strikes on its nuclear sites would be 'economic suicide' as the UK is warned it could be hit hard Iran has been warned that shutting down a crucial Middle East oil "choke point" following US strikes on its nuclear facilities would be tantamount to "economic suicide", as reported by The Telegraph. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called on Iran's allies, including China, to exert pressure on Tehran to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, stating that any closure would be a "terrible mistake". "I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that, because they heavily depend on the Straits of Hormuz for their oil," Mr Rubio said during an interview with Fox News. "If they do that, it will be another terrible mistake. It's economic suicide for them if they do it. And we retain options to deal with that, but other countries should be looking at that as well. It would hurt other countries' economies a lot worse than ours," he continued. In retaliation for US strikes, Iranian lawmakers have voted to obstruct vital shipping routes through this key waterway after Donald Trump decided to engage in the conflict between Israel and Iran, reports the Express. However, the vote by the Iranian parliament is not definitive, and state television has emphasised that the ultimate decision lies with Iran's top security officials, Reuters reports. The narrow strait, situated within Iranian territorial waters, is considered the most critical oil transit choke point globally, with approximately one-fifth of all worldwide oil supplies and a third of liquefied natural gas passing through it. Any efforts to disrupt maritime traffic by deploying mines or missiles could trigger a global oil crisis, skyrocket inflation rates and potentially plunge the economy into a downturn. On Sunday, specialists cautioned that such a move to shut the strait might also elicit "a significant military response" from both the United States and its allies. Eurasia Group, a leading consultancy in political risk, advised clients: "The US has amassed a massive military presence in the Gulf and surrounding region, and a move by Iran against the strait would almost certainly trigger a significant military response." Ami Daniel, CEO of maritime data company Windward, noted that even the mere "perception" of an Iranian assault on shipping could reduce maritime traffic to a mere trickle. He further remarked: "People are talking about whether they block the Strait of Hormuz, but how about if they just make it very dangerous to go through?". "Commercial shipping is not the Navy. They don't have to go. So actually, even just increasing the risk to go there will gradually make a big difference versus blocking it completely." As anxieties mount regarding a fresh oil emergency, countless drivers could be hit with soaring fuel costs at the filling stations. The UK, which relies on imports for roughly half its oil supply, stands to be particularly exposed. Following President Trump's ultimatum giving Iran two weeks to start talks, crude oil settled around $77 a barrel last Friday, as market players speculated that any immediate conflict was likely to be averted. Amidst escalating tension, market analysts are bracing for a surge in prices come Monday, as the "risk barometer" skyrockets. There's chatter that we could be looking at $100 a barrel or even higher on the horizon.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Europeans back higher defence spending amid Russia threat, poll finds
Faced with an unpredictable Donald Trump and an aggressive Russia, Europeans favour increased spending on defence and, in some countries, compulsory military service. A survey of 12 countries for the European Council on Foreign Relations showed majorities for increased defence spending in Poland (70%), Denmark (70%) and the UK (57%). Support was softer elsewhere, but large minorities in Germany (47%), Spain (46%) and France (45%) also backed bigger military budgets. Italy was an outlier: only 17% favoured higher spending, with 57% against. Europeans in several countries supported reintroducing mandatory military service, with the crucial exception of 18- to 29-year-olds – those most likely to be called up in any armed conflict. People in France (62%), Germany (53%) and Poland (51%) were the strongest supporters of military service. Opposition to the idea outweighed support in countries including Italy (50% against), the UK (53%), Spain (56%) and Hungary (58%). Older people were keenest on the draft. In Germany, for example, a net total of 49% of over-70s supported military service, while a net total of 46% of 18- to 29-year-olds opposed the idea. The research also found the European public divided sharply over Trump, whose return to the US presidency has scrambled traditional allegiances to Washington. Countries with traditionally strong ties with the US are becoming increasingly sceptical of the US system: in the UK and Germany, majorities of 74% and 67% think it is broken. 'EU-US relations are now increasingly ideological,' the ECFR's Ivan Krastev and Mark Leonard wrote in a paper to accompany the findings. 'In many respects the relations of the far-right parties to Trump start to resemble the relationship of former communist parties to the Soviet Union in the cold war. They feel obliged to defend Trump and to imitate him.' European far-right parties, which often took inspiration from Vladimir Putin's Russia, now look to Trump's system as a model, the authors suggest. In contrast, voters for mainstream parties are critical of Trump and the US political system. Far-right and national populist allegiance to Trump exists, despite sizeable minorities of voters for those parties seeing his re-election as bad news for Americans. For instance, 34% of AfD voters in Germany, 28% of France's National Rally supporters and 30% of Reform UK voters consider Trump's re-election as 'very bad' or 'rather bad' for Americans. The findings come on the eve of a Nato summit this week where members of the alliance will be asked to raise defence spending to at least 5% of GDP a year by 2032. Spain has already rejected the target as 'unreasonable' and 'counterproductive'. Italy wants to delay the deadline until 2035. Voters in most countries polled are sceptical that Europe can be independent of the US. Citizens in Germany, Spain, Poland and Italy were more likely to say it would be very difficult or practically impossible for the EU to become independent of the US in defence and security. Only in Denmark did a slim majority (52%) consider it was possible for the EU to achieve autonomy in defence and security. Denmark, which is directly threatened by Trump's claims over Greenland, also showed the highest antipathy towards the US president: 86% believe the US political system is broken, while 76% rated Trump's re-election as a bad thing for US citizens. Several European publics support developing an alternative national nuclear deterrent that does not rely on the US, with the strongest support in Poland (60%), Portugal (62%) and Spain (54%). In Germany, support for such an idea was only 39%. The chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has proposed that his country could share nuclear weapons with France and Britain but also said this could not replace the US's protective shield over much of Europe. Sign up to Headlines Europe A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day after newsletter promotion In an encouraging sign for Kyiv, most Europeans oppose following the US if Trump pushes Ukraine to cede occupied territories or lifts economic sanctions against Russia. Even in Hungary, which has a government that has consistently slowed agreement on EU sanctions, 40% oppose copying any US move to lift sanctions, while 38% were in favour. In other countries there were strong majorities against emulating any pro-Russia policy on Ukraine that may come from the US. The report's authors suggest two explanations for this support for Ukraine. 'A benevolent interpretation is that Europeans support an autonomous European policy to support Ukraine and they don't want to blindly follow Trump's lead. But another reading of that data is that Europeans want Ukrainians to continue fighting on their behalf.' Leonard said: 'Our poll shows that Europeans feel unsafe and that Trump is driving demand for increased defence spending, the reintroduction of military service and an extension of nuclear capabilities across much of Europe.' Krastev, who is chair of the Centre for Liberal Strategies, said: 'The real effect of Trump's second coming is that the United States now presents a credible model for Europe's far right. To be pro-American today mostly means to be sceptical of the EU; to be pro-European means being critical of Trump's America.' Pollsters commissioned by ECFR spoke to 16,440 adults last month.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
The strait of Hormuz: what is it, and why does it matter to global trade?
President Donald Trump's unprecedented decision to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites has deepened fears of a widening conflict in the Middle East. Joining Israel in the biggest western military action against the Islamic Republic since its 1979 revolution, the world is now bracing for Iran's response. One way Iran could retaliate, analysts say, is to close off the strait of Hormuz, a vital trade route, through which over a fifth of the world's oil supply, 20m barrels, and much of its liquified gas, passes each day. Iran has in the past threatened to close the strait, which would restrict trade and impact global oil prices, but has never followed through on the threat. Among the world's most important oil chokepoints, the strait of Hormuz is geo-strategically important to the United States and beyond, as the strength of the global economy is heavily dependent on the flow of oil. The strait lies between Oman and Iran and links the Gulf to the north with the Gulf of Oman to the south and the Arabian Sea beyond. It is 33km wide at its narrowest point, with the shipping lane just 3km wide. About one-fifth of the world's total oil consumption passes through the strait. Between the start of 2022 and last month, approximately 17.8 million to 20.8m barrels of crude, condensate, and fuels flowed through the strait daily, according to data from analytics firm Vortexa. Members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) – Saudi Arabia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Iraq – export most of their crude via the strait, mainly to Asia. The US Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, is tasked with protecting commercial shipping in the area. Closing the strait has the advantage of being a means to impose a direct cost on Trump, as it would trigger an oil price spike with a near immediate inflationary effect in the US and across the globe. But it would also be an act of dramatic economic self-harm. Iranian oil uses the same gateway, and shutting Hormuz risks bringing Gulf Arab states, who have been highly critical of the Israeli attack, into the war to safeguard their own interests. In particular, closing the strait would significantly harm China. The world's second-largest economy buys almost 90% of Iran's oil exports, which are subject to international sanctions. US secretary of state Marco Rubio has called on China to help stop Iran from closing it, telling Fox news: 'I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that, because they heavily depend on the strait of Hormuz for their oil.' 'If they do that, it will be another terrible mistake,' he added, 'It's economic suicide for them if they do it.' There are already reports that some supertankers have U-turned in the strategic waterway following the US strikes. Iran's Press TV reported at the weekend that the Iranian parliament approved a measure to close the strait of Hormuz, but ultimately the decision will come down to Iran's top leaders. On Sunday Iran's foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, hinted at what could be an open-ended retaliation when he said that Trump's decision to bomb Iran 'will have everlasting consequences'. In his first comments since the US joined Israel's war on his country, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that Israel has made a 'grave mistake' and 'must be punished', but did not make any specific reference to the strait of Hormuz.
