Strikes and diplomacy: How Trump's two-week deadline shapes US strategy on Iran
Shafaq News / As tensions escalate between Iran and Israel, US President Donald Trump initially gave a two-week deadline to decide on direct intervention against Tehran. However, he shortened the period significantly and proceeded with strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
Despite the strikes, the deadline appears to remain in effect in some form, particularly after Trump announced no further action for the time being. Attention now turns to the unfolding developments and their impact on the region, especially Iraq.
In an Interview with Shafaq News Agency, Thomas Warrick, a Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council, clarified that the Trump's two-week deadline signals three distinct objectives:
'First, it's an opening to get diplomatic negotiations going with Tehran. Trump understands it will take time to bring Iran back to the table, but that's clearly his goal.'
Secondly, Trump appears to be allowing time for additional US military assets to reach the region, enhancing the credibility of any threat of force. Warrick cited movements such as the USS Nimitz sailing toward the Arabian Sea and recent sightings of B-2 bombers likely headed toward Guam or Diego Garcia—capable platforms for delivering bunker-busting ordnance.
The third element, Warrick noted, is political, 'He wants to show his base—and the world—that he's giving diplomacy one last chance before resorting to force. This is Trump trying to prove that any military action would only come after exhausting peaceful options.'
A Flexible Deadline, Trump-Style
When asked whether two weeks is enough to defuse the crisis, Warrick offered a nuanced perspective rooted in Trump's communication style.
'In Trump's language, 'two weeks' can mean anything. It could be three days, it could be never. There's a long history of him using this phrase ambiguously.'
He added that Trump's spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, had delivered the deadline in the form of a direct presidential quote, implying it came straight from the Oval Office.
'It's a flexible deadline. Not too far removed from Arabic 'Inshallah' or Spanish 'mañana.' But still, this is a serious offer of diplomacy,' Warrick explained.
Military Posturing as Pressure
Trump's decision to bolster US forces in the region isn't just precautionary—it's strategic. 'Trump is all about leverage. He wants Iran to know that he's not bluffing,' Warrick said.
'The presence of aircraft carriers and bombers capable of striking hardened nuclear facilities like Fordow sends a clear message: if diplomacy fails, force is on the table.'
However, Warrick emphasized that Trump would still prefer a negotiated outcome, calling it his 'first option.'
Iran at a Crossroads
When asked about Iran's likely response, Warrick presented a stark choice facing Tehran's leadership: 'Option one: negotiate, dismantle the nuclear program, and see crippling sanctions lifted. Option two: lose the nuclear program through military strikes—and still face sanctions.'
He concluded that Iran's leaders must decide whether to preserve national dignity at great cost or accept a diplomatic deal that could ease decades of economic suffering.
'Either way, they lose the nuclear program. But only one path gives something back to the Iranian people. From that perspective, it's in their interest to take Trump's offer.'
International Political Tool?
Political analyst Ihab al-Kayyali explained that in the world of international politics, major powers often use multiple tools to pressure rivals without resorting directly to war. One such tool, he said, is the time-bound ultimatum. Trump's deadline signals a required move from Iran, with harsh consequences if unmet.
Al-Kayyali noted that the deadline was intended to pressure Iran to halt uranium enrichment, demonstrate strength to both American and global audiences, and prepare the political and media landscape for upcoming diplomatic or military steps. If Iran does not comply, the US may impose further sanctions, mobilize forces, launch limited strikes, or escalate rhetoric to rally domestic and international support.
Problem of the 'Deadline'
Iranian affairs researcher Saeed Sharoudi argued that the two-week deadline reflects Tehran's fundamental issue with Washington: the US outlines terms unilaterally and expects Iran to comply.
Speaking to Shafaq News Agency, he recalled a previous two-month deadline set by Trump that failed to produce a deal, followed by a green light to Israel to target Iranian nuclear sites.
Sharoudi noted that the same miscalculation is being repeated with the current shorter deadline. A lasting resolution, he said, is unlikely without US recognition of Iran's right to enrich uranium for its nuclear needs. Only then, he added, could a major obstacle to negotiations be removed.
He stressed that Iran's primary concern in talks—rarely acknowledged by Trump—is the lifting and non-repetition of Western sanctions and a guarantee against future attacks under any pretext.
Diplomatic Opportunity?
Political researcher Nawal al-Moussawi highlighted that the deadline followed Trump's assurances to Arab leaders, particularly Qatar, that the US would not engage militarily with Iran.
She noted, in an interview with Shafaq News, that the window allows diplomacy to take its course amid active regional and European efforts, possibly paving the way for a preliminary agreement.
Al-Moussawi also pointed to the deadline as a test of Israel's ability to sustain conflict without direct US involvement, with opinion in Washington divided over whether to join the war.
'Some view the conflict as inevitable, while others worry about its repercussions on Americans, especially given Iran's limited long-range strike capability,' she concluded.
An Either-Or Scenario
Dr. Ihsan al-Shammari, head of the Political Thinking Center and professor of strategic and international studies at the University of Baghdad, described Trump's two-week deadline as having dual tracks.
'The first is an opportunity for Iran to respond to US conditions previously rejected, aimed at preserving its regime and territorial integrity.'
Al-Shammari said this aligns with Trump's foreign policy approach toward regional stability and appears to be a response to ally requests, possibly involving mediation by Saudi Arabia, Oman, and the European troika. Accordingly, Trump allowed space for negotiations.
Simultaneously, he noted that Trump is preparing militarily along two lines: enabling Israel to dismantle Iran's capabilities and completing US military preparations within the deadline to enter the conflict if Iran does not capitulate unconditionally. 'Reports of additional US troop deployments support this,' adding that Trump has set two clear paths for Iran—negotiation or military action.
Iraq on Alert
On the potential fallout in Iraq, Al-Shammari said the country and region are in a state of anticipation. There is widespread unease about the environmental and geopolitical consequences of the attacks on nuclear sites, possible closure of the Strait of Hormuz, disruption to energy supplies, and the prospect of a regional war affecting several countries. Iraq, he emphasized, shares these concerns.
However, Iraq has its own complexity, he explained, with armed factions declaring their intent to join the war if the US intervenes, topples the Iranian regime, or targets Iran's Supreme Leader. As such, Iraq remains on alert.
He revealed that preemptive decisions had been made in Iraq under a pact between factions and the Coordination Framework. But this agreement, he warned, is fragile and would collapse if the US enters the war alongside Israel or targets factions in Iraq.
Al-Shammari concluded that if such a scenario unfolds, Iraq would be the hardest hit due to its fragility and role as a battleground for external agendas. He cautioned that the country could emerge from the conflict on the threshold of a new Middle East.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Memri
34 minutes ago
- Memri
Following U.S. Attack On Iran, Iran-Backed Militias In Yemen And Iraq Call For Jihad Against U.S. And Israel, Threaten Response Which Will 'Ignite The Region,' Declare 'Confrontation Has Begun'
On June 22, 2025, U.S. President Trump called a press conference at the White House and announced that earlier on the same day the United States Army had attacked three major nuclear sites in Iran – Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan.[1] Most of the Iran-backed militias in Yemen and Iraq have yet to issue official responses to the American attack, but media outlets affiliated with them harshly condemned it, describing it as "a grave escalation" and part of the "criminal" American support for Israel. They threatened "to ignite the region" and to attack the American forces deployed there, and urged the entire Islamic nation to wage jihad against the U.S. and Israel. The same militias estimated that Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz and activate the militias it supports in various countries, such as Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Pakistan, and Azerbaijan. The following is a review of reactions from Iran-backed militias in Yemen and Iraq to the U.S. attack on Iran on June 22, 2025: The Houthi Political Bureau posted a statement it which it condemned "the tyrannical and cowardly American aggression" and described it as "a grave escalation and a direct threat to regional and international peace and security." It also said that the American attack came in the framework of "the criminal and unlimited support" of the U.S. for Israel, and was due to Iran's support for the Palestinian issue and the jihad and resistance movements that oppose Israel. He declared that the Houthis stand with Iran against "the Zionist-American aggression," and urged the Islamic nation to adopt "the option of jihad and resistance, and to act as one, against the Zionist-American arrogance."[2] Ghurabaa Al-Ridwan, a Telegram channel affiliated with Iran-backed militias in Iraq, shared a series of posts in which it threatened that the response to the American attack "would not be limited and [the attack] would exact a price. Every point of American deployment will be under the fire of the fury and the address is clear: the region will be ignited and no place in it will be safe any longer." Another post, signed by an unknown group that calls itself "The Special Cell (Ashab Al-Kahf)" read: "The war against the U.S. and its agents in Iraq has begun. The Ayn Al-Assad airbase in Iraq's Al-Anbar Governorate, Camp Al-Harir in Erbil, Victory Base near the Baghdad airport, Habbaniyah base in Al-Anbar Governorate, the espionage and transmission interception and monitoring stations in Sulaymaniyah and the joint operations rooms in the Green [Zone in Baghdad where the U.S. Embassy is located], every hand that served the enemy – we will sever it, and every hypocritical voice – we will silence it. The hour of confrontation has begun."[3] The Telegram channel surmised that Iran would reserve the right to respond to "the terrorist U.S." and would close the Strait of Hormuz, and also that "fronts would open against the American bases: from Yemen (by the Houthis), from Lebanon (by Hizbullah), from Iraq (by all the [resistance] factions), from Pakistan (by the Zaynabiyoun Brigade), and from Azerbaijan (by the Khomeiniyoun Brigade)."[4] The Sons of Imam Ali in Syria Telegram channel, affiliated with the country's Alawite community, shared a poster that shows the deployment of "the American occupation bases in the [Middle East] region that are within range of the Iranian missiles." The map on the poster depicts the countries that host American army bases, such as: Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Oman, Bahrain and Kuwait, and includes the alleged numbers of soldiers stationed on the bases.[5] The Sabereen News Telegram channel, which supports Iran-backed Iraqi Shi'ite militias, posted a photograph of a ship that it claimed is in Israeli waters "facing the coasts of Haifa and Nahariya" which is now "a legitimate target of the Shi'ite missiles." It described what it claimed is the mission of the ship, which it said is to provide rescue, transport, and technical and logistic support.[6] It is notable that during the days that preceded the American attack, senior officials in Iran-backed militias in Yemen and Iraq threatened to attack American forces and interests in the Middle East, should America intervene in the Israel-Iran war. They also threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz and Bab Al-Mandab Strait, and to attack American ships in the Red Sea.[7]
Memri
34 minutes ago
- Memri
Media Figures In Qatar Condemn U.S. Attack On Iran's Nuclear Facilities, Vilify President Donald Trump: He Is A Brazen Liar Who Has Revealed His Ugly Face
The June 22, 2025 U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear facilities sparked furious responses from journalists and public opinion shapers in Qatar, who harshly condemned the U.S. and its President, Donald Trump. In addition to a statement by Qatar's foreign ministry that expressed "regret" over "the deterioration of the situation " and warned of "catastrophic consequences at both the regional and international levels,"[1] Al-Jazeera presenters and columnists for Qatar's government papers took to X to slam the U.S. and its president, calling Trump a "brazen liar," "the leader of a modern crusade," and a "war criminal" who has "revealed his ugly face" and is " looking for false personal glory." They also described the Americans as "infidels" and "plotters" seeking to "ignite wars and destroy peoples." Retired Qatari general Mubarak Al-Khayareen focused his invective on Israel, writing after the U.S. attack that, while "there is [some] benefit in the U.S. being strong alongside Russia and China, in order to maintain the global balance [of power]," Israel "must be destroyed and eliminated and must disappear." It should be noted that Qatari journalists have been expressing support for Iran since the start of the Israel-Iran war.[2] The following are some of the responses posted by media figures in Qatar slamming the U.S. and Trump for the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Al-Jazeera Presenter: President Trump Is A Brazen Liar; The U.S. Is A Plague In a series of X posts on June 22, following the U.S. strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, Al-Jazeera presenter Hayat Al-Yamani cursed the U.S. and President Trump, accusing them of lies and deceit. She wrote: "Lie, Trump, lie again and again, and then boast about being a brazen liar." In another post, she wrote: "The U.S. is the plague, and the plague is the U.S." One of Al-Yamani's posts In a third post she added: "Every resident of that despicable part of the world called America should feel ashamed of his president's and his leaders' involvement in a disgraceful lie and [of the fact that] they engaged in diplomacy through hollow negotiations aimed at buying time and carrying out a brazen act of deception. Who will ever want to sit at the negotiating table again with [this] deceitful negotiator?" [3] Another post by Al-Yamani Al-Jazeera Presenter Characterizes Americans As Infidel Plotters Al-Jazeera presenter Mustafa Ashour posted a Quranic verse (8:30): " The unbelievers plotted to imprison, murder or expel you [O Muhammad]. They plot, but Allah too plots and Allah is the best of plotters."[4] Mustafa Ashour's post Columnist For Qatari Government Daily: Trump Is Leading A Modern Crusade; The Americans Are Manufacturers Of Chaos And Engineers Of Destruction Jordanian journalist Ihsan Al-Faqih, a columnist for the Qatari government daily Al-Sharq and the Qatari-owned London-based daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi, quoted statements made by President Trump and responded to them: "'There's no military in the world that could have done what we did' – This is not the president of a country [talking], but the leader of a modern crusade boasting about destroying facilities and the sovereignty of [other] countries. He speaks about bombing a country with millions of people as if it were an ant crushed under his boot, and as if Iran were nothing more than a stage for flexing muscles ahead of elections... 'What we did, nobody else could do' – That's true, Trump. No one ignites wars and destroys peoples like you do. From Iraq to Afghanistan, from Palestine to Iran, you are manufacturers of chaos and engineers of destruction. Your history is not full of heroic deeds, but full of open graves.'[5] Qatari Columnist: Trump Is A National Disgrace; He Has Revealed His Ugly Face Abdullah Al-Amadi, a columnist for the Qatari government daily Al-Sharq, shared photos of U.S. President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and wrote in English under the hashtags "Trump Is a National Disgrace" and "Trump Is War Criminal": "Trump showed his ugly face to the world & contradicted American public opinion by strongly supporting the war criminal Netanyahu & his racist occupation regime, by entering the war against Iran, claiming that it is the largest country supporting terrorism, while Israhell is the largest gathering of terrorists & racists in the world. He is proving to the world that he is looking for false personal glory, even at the expense of the security of his people, who will become a target. Trump is no different from Netanyahu, both are two sides of the same coin."[6] Abdullah Al-Amadi's post Retired Qatari General: Israel Must Be Destroyed And Eliminated Retired Qatari general Mubarak Al-Khayareen, wrote on his X account: "There is [some] benefit in the U.S. being strong alongside Russia and China, in order to maintain the global balance [of power], but Israel must be destroyed and eliminated and must disappear. This should be a strategic Arab doctrine. This reminds [us] of the words of [Hamas founder] Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who said that Israel had been built on a foundation of injustice and oppression, and that any entity founded on injustice and oppression is destined to perish. [Operation] Al-Aqsa Flood [i.e., Hamas' October 7 attack on Israel showed us that the Israelis have no connection to the land and that they admit they are occupying the land of others and that they are transient."[7]
Memri
35 minutes ago
- Memri
Rojava as an Inspiration: What Should the Kurds of Rojhelat Kurdistan Do in Iran?
While the Israeli military operation 'Rising Lion' against the Iranian regime aims to dismantle Iran's nuclear program, eliminate its ballistic missile capabilities, and curb Tehran's malign influence across the Middle East, it also presents a rare opportunity to overthrow the Velayat-e Faqih regime and put an end to the tyranny of the Ayatollahs. This calls on the Kurdish movement in Rojhelat/East Kurdistan, as well as the movements of other peoples in Iran, such as the Arabs, Balochis, Azeris, and democratic-minded Persians, to seize the current moment and work toward achieving this goal. In this context, Iranian Kurdish groups have issued various statements in response to Israel's operation against Iran, viewing it as a significant opportunity to overthrow the theocratic Velayat-e Faqih regime and transition the country toward a democratic system that respects its ethnic diversity. 'As Long As This Regime Remains In Power, The Situation Will Only Deteriorate' The Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI), the oldest Iranian Kurdish party, said in a statement: 'As long as this regime remains in power, the situation will only deteriorate. Therefore, the first and most important prerequisite for saving Iran's citizens from this crisis, destruction and darkness is to completely remove and end this regime.'[1] The Kurdistan Freedom Party (PAK) has taken an explicit stance in support of these attacks and the process of destroying Iranian military and security capabilities: 'PAK insists on a nationwide uprising to end the regime or to reduce it in Tehran. It hopes that the people's uprising will end 46 years of crime and plunder and bring the judgment.'[2] Commenting on the ongoing war, the Secretary General of the Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan, Abdullah Mohtadi, said in a television interview: 'The Iranian people reject the Islamic Republic's costly nuclear ambitions.' He called for 'a democratic, secular, and federal Iran that serves its people and lives in peace with its neighbors.'[3] The Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK) said in its statement: 'We believe that transitioning to a Democratic Republic of Iran requires shifting perspectives and departing from power-seeking, nationalism, patriarchy, and centralism. We affirm our duty to defend our people and the other peoples of Iran against any form of repression or threat of massacre. We will fulfill this duty within the framework of legitimate self-defense of our rights and existence.'[4] (Source: 'The Kurdish Liberation Movement In Rojhelat Kurdistan And Iran Can Draw Upon The Experience Of The Kurds In Rojava During The Syrian Conflict' The Kurds in Iran constitute approximately 25% of the population, estimated at around 20 million people. They are spread across ten provinces in western Iran, a region commonly referred to as Rojhelat Kurdistan (Eastern Kurdistan). This region includes major Kurdish cities such as Urmia, Mahabad, Sinna (Sanandaj), Kermashan (Kermanshah), Saqqez, Ilam, and Lorestan. Additionally, Kurds are present in Khorasan, in eastern Iran, near the borders with Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. Rojhelat Kurdistan is characterized by economic wealth, abundant water resources, and significant oil and gas fields, along with various mineral deposits. There are also estimates suggesting the presence of rare earth element reserves. The Kurds in Iran speak various Kurdish dialects, including Kurmanji, Sorani, Kalhuri, and Luri, and embrace different religious sects such as Sunni Islam, Feyli, and Kakayi (Yarsan). Rojhelat Kurdistan is also inhabited by minorities such as Arabs in areas near Ahwaz, Azeris in the north, as well as Armenians and Assyrians. Most of the Jewish community has emigrated to the state of Israel. The Kurdish struggle in Rojhelat Kurdistan has a long history, dating back to the 1940s, when the Republic of Kurdistan in Mahabad was declared in 1946. That republic, however, was crushed in less than a year, and its leaders were executed by the Shah's regime. Just as the Shah's regime had done, repression and forced assimilation policies against the Kurds in Iran continued under the mullahs' regime, which came to power in 1979. At various stages, the Kurdish movements confronted this subjugation and repression through political struggle and armed resistance. Meanwhile, under the pressure of Israeli attacks in Operation 'Rising Lion', the possibility of the Iranian regime's collapse is growing due to its weakening capabilities and exposed vulnerabilities. Therefore, the Kurdish liberation movement in Rojhelat Kurdistan and Iran can draw upon the experience of the Kurds in Rojava during the Syrian conflict. That experience enabled them to defend themselves and establish a model of democratic autonomy based on gender equality and cultural pluralism. 'The Establishment Of An Autonomous Or Federal Region in Rojhelat Kurdistan Is A Realistic Prospect' Although the Kurdish parties – PDKI, Komala, PAK, and PJAK – each have a military wing, Iranian pressure on the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and Baghdad has compelled some of these parties to evacuate their camps in the mountain ranges along the Iraq-Iran border. Only PJAK has resisted this pressure and continues to maintain its forces in those areas. It is worth noting that fighters from this group took part alongside the People's Protection Units (YPG) in the fight against ISIS in 2015 during the Battle of Kobani The establishment of an autonomous or federal region in Rojhelat Kurdistan is a realistic prospect in light of current developments. This requires Kurdish movements to unify their military efforts, coordinate with the United States, and even establish channels of communication with Israel. In this regard, the experience of the People's Protection Units (YPG) – which became the backbone of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in partnership with the international coalition – serves as a relevant model. The model of pluralistic democratic governance practiced by the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) – which respects cultural diversity – offers a valuable experience from which Rojhelat Kurdistan can benefit. It may also serve as an inspiration for other ethnic groups in Iran, such as the Balochis, Arabs, and Azeris, to build upon. This would certainly help break the centralized authoritarianism imposed by the ruling regime in Tehran and advance the idea of peaceful coexistence, standing in stark contrast to the ethnic and sectarian conflicts perpetuated by the doctrine of Velayat-e Faqih. 'Jin – Jiyan – Azadi' (Woman – Life – Freedom) Such a model also promotes gender equality and liberates women, who have long suffered under the patriarchal mentality of the mullahs' regime. The inspiration given by Kurdish female fighters in the Women's Protection Units (YPJ) for Jina (Mahsa) Amini's uprising and the slogan 'Jin – Jiyan – Azadi' (Woman – Life – Freedom) against the Iranian regime in 2022 is an example of what Rojava's influence can be. It is noteworthy that Kurdish women from Rojhelat have also played a prominent role in military formations, whether within PJAK or the Peshmerga forces of other parties. The emergence of Kurdish self-rule in Rojhelat Kurdistan – beyond the authority and tyranny of the central power in Tehran – following the examples of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq and Rojava, has the potential to guarantee the right of millions of Kurds to self-determination in a new part of Kurdistan. This development may not be welcomed by Turkey, which occupies the largest portion of Kurdistan with a Kurdish population of approximately 30 million. Nevertheless, the success of the Kurds – anywhere in Kurdistan – in establishing a democratic, pluralistic system of governance that upholds the values of justice, freedom, and secularism ultimately serves the interests of a new Middle East, where diverse peoples coexist in peace and prosperity. Turkey's Role and Its Kurdophobia Transitioning Iran from a rogue state to a democratic and peaceful nation – both for its own people and for the broader Middle East – also requires distancing it from the malign influence of Turkey, which has long been an ally of the Velayat-e Faqih regime, and has provided it with a backdoor channel to circumvent sanctions. Driven by its anti-Kurdish sentiment, evident in its actions in Rojava, Turkey may seek either to prolong the life of the Iranian regime or exploit its weakness to impose its own agenda on the peoples of Iran, thereby depriving them of freedom and democracy. Therefore, Israel and Western nations must deliver a clear and decisive message to Turkey, urging it to cease its destabilizing interference, just as it is currently doing in Syria by backing a "Version 2.0" of the Velayat-e Faqih regime through the empowerment of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham to assume control in Damascus, with the aim of monopolizing power and excluding other components, particularly the Kurds. *Çeleng Omer, a prominent economist from Kurdish-led North and East Syria, is a former resident of Afrin and professor at Afrin University. He was forced to flee the region due to the ongoing Turkish occupation.
