Trump struggles with Iran message as Republicans diverge over attack
As the massive size and scope of Israel's overnight attacks on Iran have come into view on Friday, Donald Trump is presented with a major new foreign policy crisis - as well as a diplomatic dilemma.How does the American president who promised to be a peacemaker handle a dramatic military escalation in the Middle East?In the hours after the strike, Trump appears to be struggling to find a consistent message in the face of a grave blow to his diplomatic efforts.Last night, US diplomats reacted coolly to the first reports of the Israeli strikes. While it was clear that American forces had advance notice of what was coming, a statement from Secretary of State Marco Rubio emphasised the US was not involved in the logistics or planning of the attack.By Friday morning, the president himself was commenting on his Truth Social account, with a sombre message directed at the Iranian leadership - more "I told you so" than a clear plan to stop the warfare."Certain Iranian hardliners spoke bravely, but they didn't know what was about to happen," Trump wrote. "They are all DEAD now, and it will only get worse!"He followed that up with a shorter post, noting that the 60-day deadline he had given the Iranians for a deal had expired - but still holding out hope. "Now they have, perhaps, a second chance!" he wrote.
Live: Latest update as Israel targets Iran's nuclear sitesIran is reeling - and it may only be the startIsrael has inflicted unprecedented damage on Iran's elite - why now?What we know about Israel's attacks on Iran
In comments to American media outlets, though, Trump's message was more muddled.He told CNN that the US "of course" supports Israel "and supported it like nobody has ever supported it"."I think it's been excellent," he said of Israel's strikes in an ABC interview. He added that the US gave Iran a chance, but they didn't take it. "They got hit about as hard as you're going to get hit. And there's more to come - a lot more."In another twist, to the Wall Street Journal he said the US received more than just a heads-up from Israel: "We know what's going on." He also called Israel's move "a very successful attack, to put it mildly."
According to Daniel Byman, from Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, Israel's move represents a new willingness to go against American preferences in the region. For a more traditional American administration, such open defiance would be a significant affront.But for Trump, his grab-bag of comments after Israel's attack illustrates how different rules apply - and that while Israel is clearly operating according to its own schedule and agenda, that may not lead to a clear break between the two longtime allies."He doesn't feel bound by any of his past statements," Byman said.As Iran assesses the damage – including more than 90 dead, explosions in its capital city Tehran, and what the Israel Defense Force described as significant damage to the Natanz nuclear facility - Israel is activating tens of thousands of its soldiers and continuing what its officials say will be a two-week military campaign. The prospects for peace seem dimmer by the hour.Trump's strategy, at the moment, appears to be hoping that the military action jolts Iran into making new concessions – a delicate dance of distancing the US from Israel's actions while still trying to use them to gain advantage at the negotiating table.Iran's Revolutionary Guards chief killed by IsraelHow attack on Iran could hit oil pricesBy his own acknowledgement, however, key Iranian leaders have been killed in the strikes - and Iran is currently focusing its diplomatic efforts on appeals to the United Nations Security Council, where it has labelled Israel's action an "act of war"."I think that Netanyahu just torpedoed the nuclear talks for the time being," said Sina Azodi, assistant professor of Middle East Politics in George Washington University's School of International Affairs. "You cannot beat up a guy and then say come and negotiate with me."The US still plans to hold scheduled talks with Iranian officials in Oman on Sunday. Will Todman, a senior fellow in the Middle East programme at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, said a US-Iranian deal, if it were to happen, would have a "dramatic impact" on Israel's strategy going forward."Israel would be much more constrained in the approach that it can take to its efforts to downgrade Iran's nuclear programme, but also its military capabilities," he said, adding that any kind of deal was unlikely to happen at this point.
That may be just fine with some key members of the Republican Party - exposing what could be a growing divide between conservative pro-Israel foreign policy hawks in Congress and the America First, isolationist sympathies of many in the Trump administration."How does the America First foreign policy doctrine and foreign policy agenda... stay consistent with this right now?" Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and vocal Trump supporter, asked during an internet livestream that was broadcasting as the Israeli strikes began Thursday evening, Politico reported.At about the same time, more bellicose Republicans were celebrating the attacks on social media.Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina took to X to post: "Game on. Pray for Israel"."Israel IS right - and has a right - to defend itself!" Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson wrote.Within the White House, many of the more vocal advocates for military action against Iran have been sidelined in recent months, including former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, who reportedly had consulted with Israel on Iran attack plans before Trump requested his resignation in early May.The president's most senior advisers, including Vice-President JD Vance, have been wary of allowing America to be pulled into new conflicts – or becoming overly involved in foreign policy concerns that they view as removed from core US interests."Previously, it seems that those advocating for restraint were ascendant in the in the administration, but I think ultimately, this comes down to President Trump alone," said Todman. "The statements that we saw from him this morning seem to indicate that he's open to providing more support to Israel, depending on how the next few days play out."With American forces based across the Middle East, involvement may be unavoidable. Just five months into his second term in office, the peacemaker president could have a new war on his hands.Additional reporting by Brandon Drenon
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
9 minutes ago
- BBC News
Was Iran months away from producing a nuclear bomb?
Israel has struck dozens of targets across Iran, damaging the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and assassinating top military commanders and nuclear scientists in the first wave of attacks on Thursday night, the Iranian foreign minister condemned what he called Israel's "reckless" attacks on his country's "peaceful nuclear facilities". Iran has since launched retaliatory air strikes on Araghchi said Natanz was operated under the monitoring of the global nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and that the strikes on the facility risked a "radiological disaster".However, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the operation was necessary to "roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival".He said Israel had acted because "if not stopped, Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time". "It could be a year. It could be within a few months," he updates: Iran retaliates with missile attacks on Israel, as Netanyahu urges Iranians to stand up to regimeIsrael's endgame may be regime change in Iran - but it's a gambleIran is reeling from Israel's unprecedented attack - and it is only the startWho were the Iranian commanders killed in Israel's attack? Is there evidence Iran was working on a nuclear bomb? The Israeli military said it had accumulated intelligence showing that "concrete progress" had been made "in the Iranian regime's efforts to produce weapons components adapted for a nuclear bomb", including a uranium metal core and a neutron source initiator for triggering the nuclear Davenport, director for non-proliferation policy at the US-based Arms Control Association, said Israel's prime minister "did not present any clear or compelling evidence that Iran was on the brink of weaponizing"."Iran has been at a near-zero breakout for months," she told the BBC, referring to the time it would take Iran to acquire enough fissile material for one bomb if it chose to do so."Similarly, the assessment that Iran could develop a crude nuclear weapon within a few months is not new."She said some of Iran's nuclear activities would be applicable to developing a bomb, but US intelligence agencies had assessed that Iran was not engaged in key weaponization March, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told Congress that Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was "at its highest levels" and "unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons".But she also said the US intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader [Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei has not authorised the nuclear weapons programme that he suspended in 2003"."If Netanyahu was purely motivated by Iran's proliferation risk, Israel would likely have shared that intelligence with the United States and the initial attack would likely have targeted all of Iran's key nuclear facilities," Ms Davenport week, the IAEA said in its latest quarterly report that Iran had amassed enough uranium enriched up to 60% purity - a short, technical step away from weapons grade, or 90% - to potentially make nine nuclear bombs. That was "a matter of serious concern", given the proliferation risks, it agency also said it could not provide assurance that the Iranian nuclear programme was exclusively peaceful because Iran was not complying with its investigation into man-made uranium particles discovered by inspectors at three undeclared nuclear sites. What do we know about Iran's nuclear programme? Iran has always said that its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful and that it has never sought to develop a nuclear a decade-long investigation by the IAEA found evidence that Iran conducted "a range of activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device" from the late 1980s until 2003, when projects under what was known as "Project Amad" were continued with some activities until 2009 - when Western powers revealed the construction of the Fordo underground enrichment facility - but after that there were "no credible indications" of weapons development, the agency 2015, Iran agreed a deal with six world powers under which it accepted restrictions on its nuclear activities and allowed rigorous monitoring by the IAEA's inspectors in return for relief from crippling limits covered its production of enriched uranium, which is used to make reactor fuel but also nuclear US President Donald Trump abandoned the deal during his first term in 2018, saying it did too little to stop a pathway to a bomb, and reinstated US sanctions. Iran retaliated by increasingly breaching the restrictions - particularly those relating to the nuclear deal, no enrichment was permitted at Fordo for 15 years. However, in 2021 Iran resumed enriching uranium to 20% purity in Thursday, the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors formally declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 said it would respond to the resolution by setting up a new uranium enrichment facility at a "secure location" and by replacing first-generation centrifuges used to enrich uranium with more advanced, sixth-generation machines at the Fordo enrichment plant. What damage has Israel done to Iran's nuclear infrastructure? The Israeli military said on Friday that its first round of air strikes damaged the underground centrifuge hall at Natanz, as well as critical infrastructure that enabled the site to IAEA's director general, Rafael Grossi, told the UN Security Council that the above-ground pilot fuel enrichment plant (PFEP) and electricity infrastructure at Natanz was destroyed. There was no indication of a physical attack on the underground hall, but that the loss of power may have damaged the centrifuges there, he US-based Institute for Science and International Security said the destruction of the PFEP was significant because the facility had been used to produced 60%-enriched uranium and also to develop advanced Davenport also said the strikes on Natanz would increase Iran's "breakout time", but that it was too soon to assess the full impact."We will not have a clear picture of how quickly Iran could resume operations there or if Iran was able to divert uranium until the IAEA can access the site," she explained. Later on Friday, Iran informed the IAEA that Israel had attacked the Fordo enrichment plant and the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Israeli military said a strike in Isfahan had "dismantled a facility for producing metallic uranium, infrastructure for reconverting enriched uranium, laboratories, and additional infrastructure". "So long as Fordo remains operational, Iran still poses a near-term proliferation risk. Tehran has the option to ratchet up enrichment to weapons grade levels at the site or divert uranium to an undeclared location," Ms Davenport prime minister also said the operation would continue for "as many days as it takes to remove this threat".But that is an unrealistic goal, according to Ms Davenport."Strikes can destroy facilities and target scientists but cannot erase Iran's nuclear knowledge. Iran can rebuild, and more quickly now than in the past due to its advances in uranium enrichment," she said.
Telegraph
11 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Three-month-old baby pulled out of rubble alive after Iran strikes Israel
A three-month-old baby was among those rescued from the rubble after retaliatory Iranian missile strikes hit homes in central Israel. At least three people were killed and 20 injured when Rishon LeZion, a suburb of Tel-Aviv, was struck by an early morning missile barrage. A police officer was seen clutching the baby, who emergency services said was lightly wounded. 'I pulled her into my arms and then gave her to the first police officer I saw, and then started lifting out all the other family members,' Idan Chen, the fire and rescue service captain, said. 'As we were doing this there were people trapped in the home above and next door – and opposite there was a fire,' he told Walla, an Israeli news outlet. Dozens of houses were damaged and some completely destroyed. Streets were strewn with rubble and burnt-out cars from the impact of the rocket. Rishon LeZion was one of a number of sites where Iranian missiles penetrated Israeli air defences on Friday night. As well as the three killed, dozens were wounded by a missile that landed near their homes, Israel's ambulance service said. 'Among the casualties: a woman around 60 was rescued without signs of life, a man around 45 was evacuated in critical condition... and was later pronounced dead,' the Magen David Adom, Israel's national medical emergency service, said, adding that 19 others were wounded. The bombing came after Israel launched its biggest-ever air offensive against its long-time foe in a bid to prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon. Air-raid sirens sounded across Israel, including in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, sending residents rushing into shelters as successive waves of Iranian missiles streaked across the skies and Israeli interceptors rose up to meet them. On Saturday, Israel Katz, Israel's defence minister, said the Iranian leadership had crossed a red line by firing at civilians and will 'pay a heavy price for it'. A missile fired from Yemen by the Iran-backed Houthi militia, killed five Palestinians including three children in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, according to the Palestinian Red Crescent. In Iran, several explosions were heard overnight in Tehran, the semi-official Tasnim news agency reported. Israel said its air force targeted the capital again on Saturday morning, hitting air-defence systems, which protect the city. 'For the first time since the beginning of the war, over 1,500 kms from Israeli territory, the IAF [Israeli military] struck defence arrays in the area of Tehran,' it said. The Fars news agency said two projectiles hit Tehran's Mehrabad airport, and Iranian media said flames were reported there. Close to key Iranian leadership sites, the airport hosts an air-force base with fighter jets and transport aircraft. Amir Saeid Iravani, Iran's UN envoy, said 78 people, including senior military officials, have been killed in Israel's strikes on Iran and more than 320 wounded, most of them civilians. Tehran launched waves of air strikes on Saturday after two salvos on Friday night, Fars reported. One of the waves targeted Tel Aviv, Israel's commercial hub, before dawn, with explosions heard as far as Jerusalem, witnesses said. Those were in response to Israel's attacks on Iran early on Friday against commanders, nuclear scientists, military targets and nuclear sites. Iran denies that its uranium enrichment activities are part of a secret weapons programme. The US military helped shoot down Iranian missiles headed to Israel on Friday, US officials said. Israel's military said Iran fired fewer than 100 missiles on Friday, and that most were intercepted or fell short. The Israeli strikes on Iran throughout the day and the Iranian retaliation raised fears of a broader regional conflagration, although Iran's allies – Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon – have been decimated by Israel. IRNA, Iran's state news agency, said Tehran launched hundreds of ballistic missiles at Israel after Israel blasted the country's huge Natanz underground nuclear site and killed its top military commanders. Israeli officials said Natanz was significantly hurt but that it may be some time before the extent of damage was clear. Western countries have long accused Iran of refining uranium there to levels suitable for a bomb rather than civilian use. The above-ground pilot enrichment plant at Natanz has been destroyed, Rafael Grossi, UN nuclear watchdog chief, told the Security Council on Friday. He said the UN was still gathering information about Israeli attacks on two other facilities, the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, 20 miles north east of the Iranian city of Qom, and another near Isfahan. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader, accused Israel of starting a war. A senior Iranian official said nowhere in Israel would be safe and revenge would be painful.
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Why Starmer must stand up to Trump at crucial G7 summit
There may not be enough maple syrup in Canada to sugar coat any diplomatic misstep by Keir Starmer as he joins arguably the most important international summit of his premiership so far. The last time the word 'Canada' passed the prime minister's lips on a trip to North America, it caused a diplomatic storm with one ally even as he was carefully trying to get another one on side. This weekend, the prime minister joins fellow leaders from the world's biggest economies - including Donald Trump - for the G7 summit in Alberta. While the leaders, hosted by recently reelected Canadian PM Mark Carney, will discuss a number of issues, top of the real agenda will be the hot topics of US tariffs, the war in Ukraine and now the combustible situation in the Middle East with Israel's America-backed attacks on Iran. Starmer - with his soft approach to dealing with Trump - will be hoping that he can stay on course to get the trade deal the two announced to great fanfare over the line. The UK prime minister will also be trying to edge Trump towards a tougher approach to Ukraine and avoid him ditching the Aukus submarine agreement with the US, UK and Australia. All this requires a careful balance of egos - particularly that of the man from the White House. Trump is at his first summit since being ousted from office in 2020. But the added picante to this summit is the overhang of a diplomatic incident Sir Keir inadvertently caused the last time he was asked about the status of Canada in the presence of President Trump. Back in March, at the White House press conference, the prime minister was pressed by The Independent's White House correspondent, Andrew Feinberg, on Trump's (ongoing) plans to turn Canada into the 51st state. Just hours after Sir Keir had handed Trump an invitation from the King for a state visit to the UK in the Oval Office, it seemed only fair to ask about the status of another part of Charles III's sovereign realms on the US border. The prime minister, desperate to be Trump's best pal, at the time, tried to laugh it off. He said: 'Look, we had a really good discussion, a productive discussion... you mentioned Canada, I think you are trying to find a divide between us that doesn't exist, we are the closest of nations. We didn't discuss Canada.' To say the failure to stand up for Canadian sovereignty did not go down well in the Commonwealth country is an understatement. Among a series of angry and disobliging quotes was one from retired Canadian ambassador Artur Wilczynski. He noted: 'Starmer's refusal to come to Canada's defence in front of Trump is more than disappointing. Canadians died for the UK by the tens of thousands. He could have opened his bloody mouth to speak up for us.' But the incident - likely to come up as an issue again with Trump next week - highlighted the near-impossible situation he has in dealing with the US President. Waving off the problems of the UK's Canadian cousins was perhaps a price worth paying if it meant goint from Obama's 'back of the queue' for a trade deal to the front of the line for Trump. Unfortunately, even though it was announced to great fanfare, the trade deal with the US still has not come into effect. Just on Thursday, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds was telling journalists in Parliament's Press Gallery lunch about his frantic calls to keep the negotiations moving. Worse still, the zero tariffs that Sir Keir thought he had won on steel could soon turn into 50 per cent tariffs if issues are not resolved soon after Trump increased his levies. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is showing outright hostility to the UK for arguably doing the right thing in sanctioning extremists in the Israeli government. Surrounded by other allies including the EU, Germany and France, Sir Keir will need to carefully balance his approach, especially if Trump gets tetchy again. For those of us who have been around a bit, we all remember the last time Trump arrived for a G7 summit in Canada in 2018 and the utter chaos it unleashed. Sir Keir could do well to call former prime minister, Baroness Theresa May, for advice on how to handle it, because this G7 is a case of deja vu. Trump infamously arrived late but was persuaded to sign a communique of the event hosted by the then-Canadian PM Justin Trudeau after he was surrounded by fellow leaders led by the then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel. In the process, the US president managed to insult the then-Japanese prime minister, the late Shinzo Abe, suggesting he would send 25 million Mexicans to Japan to teach him about migration issues. Things only got worse when he left early to fly to Singapore to meet North Korean despot Kim Jong Un. A fed-up Mr Trudeau said of Trump: "Canadians are polite and reasonable but we will also not be pushed around." Trump's ego was hurt and his swift rebuke was to accuse Trudeau of acting "meek and mild" during meetings, only to attack the US at a news conference, and order his team to unsign the communique he had agreed to support in response. When she was asked by The Independent 's Kate Devlin (then of the Sunday Express) in the subsequent press conference about whether Brits would be pushed around, Baroness May characteristically suggested Brits were 'strong and stable' - a phrase which provided the epitaph for her tumultuous premiership. She was, though, at a time somewhat traumatised by her Brexit negotiations with the EU and the political upheaval it caused in the UK. The lessons of the present and the past should act as a warning for Sir Keir to prepare for complete disarray and to expect anything. But, given recent criticism of his leadership style, he may want to be less robotic in his responses than Baroness May and might want to avoid selling out Canada again.
