Trump embraces Israeli strike after arguing against it

Yahoo

a day ago

President Donald Trump spent the bulk of this week saying he hoped Israel wouldn't strike Iran. But by Friday, he was all in.
The president had hoped for more time to negotiate with Tehran over its nuclear program, but once Israel launched the massive attack, Trump embraced the new dynamic, using it as leverage to try to seal the deal he wanted all along.
'He didn't want them to go now,' a senior administration official said about Israel. 'He understands they're a sovereign nation, and he will support them because they're our ally,' added the official, who was granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation, 'but he wanted more time.'
The administration's shift in tone in the first 24 hours after the attack underscores the balancing act the president is engaged in as he tries to assuage various factions in the administration while still maintaining pressure on Iran.
The messaging served to assure Israel that the United States had its back, nod to the hawkish faction of the Trump coalition and try to calm the jittery MAGA isolationists who have long been wary of Middle East entanglements.
The constant, however, was Trump's desire to bring Iran back to the table even as the Islamic Republic vowed retribution.
'There is still time to make this slaughter, with the next already planned attacks being even more brutal, come to an end,' Trump posted on Truth Social, his first public remarks after the Israeli attack. 'Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left.'
Trump's offer to Iran doubled as a 'direct push to Israel' to tap the brakes, the senior administration official said. But by Friday afternoon, with Iran firing dozens/hundreds of rockets toward Israel, the administration left little doubt that it was ready to support Israel's defense, a marked shift from the relatively neutral statement Secretary of State Marco Rubio released immediately after Israel's attack.
'Israel took unilateral action against Iran,' Rubio said Thursday night in a statement. 'We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region. Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense.'
But by Friday morning, Trump was calling reporters and making it clear that he knew about Israel's plans in advance, describing it as a 'very successful attack' in an interview with the Wall Street Journal.
The initial administration messaging was, 'we yellow-lighted it,' said Curt Mills, executive director of The American Conservative magazine. 'Today they said we greenlit it. Or they moved toward a light green.'
The senior Trump administration official insisted that while Washington had been informed of Israel's plans ahead of time, the United States had no role in helping plan the attack.
'We did not help plan and they didn't give us every detail,' said the person, who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive conversations within the administration.
'We purposely did not want to know the details,' they said, adding that the United States had the chance to participate in the action against Iran, but opted not to join.
Though Trump might have preferred more time to negotiate, he appeared frustrated that talks had stalled, signaling early this week that time for Iran was running out.
'They are good negotiators, but they're tough,' he said Monday at the White House. 'Sometimes they can be too tough, that's the problem. So we're trying to make a deal so that there's no destruction and death. We told them that. I have told them that. I hope that is the way it works out. It might not work out.'
The 'too tough' negotiations came as an influential group of hawkish conservatives lobbied Trump furiously to bless the Israeli government's efforts to destroy Iranian nuclear sites.
Israel's attack further exposed a rift inside Trumpworld between those hawks, who see Iran as an existential threat to Israel, and the isolationists wary of Middle East entanglements informed by the long and costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"A lot of people in the MAGA movement, and ones that have really invested a lot in electing Trump and [Vice President JD] Vance will be incredibly disappointed if this turns into a larger war and it will lead to some fractures," said a former Pentagon official granted anonymity to speak about the internal dynamics of the president's foreign policy team.