Trump asked for 2 weeks to decide, struck in 2 days: US ditches diplomacy, hits Iran's nuke sites; MAGA rift grows
President Donald Trump said he would wait two weeks to decide whether to launch a military strike on Iran. Instead, he acted within 48 hours, plunging the United States into direct participation in Israel's war against Iran and setting off fears of a broader regional conflict.
Speaking from the White House on early Sunday, just hours after American forces struck Iran's nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, Trump declared the mission a 'spectacular success.' But the decision to strike came fast, two days after the President told reporters on Thursday he would wait: 'I'm giving them (Iran) a period of time and I would say two weeks would be the maximum.'
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt had reinforced the point, saying, 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, the President will make his decision… within the next two weeks.'
Instead, on Saturday evening, Trump confirmed a full military operation was underway. 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran,' he wrote online. 'All planes are now outside of Iran air space… All planes are safely on their way home.' He added: 'This is an HISTORIC MOMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ISRAEL, AND THE WORLD. IRAN MUST NOW AGREE TO END THIS WAR.'
A familiar 'two-week' promise
Trump's abrupt pivot is not unprecedented.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Buy Brass Laxmi Ji Idol For Wealth, Peace & Happiness
Luxeartisanship
Shop Now
Undo
Over the years, he has routinely invoked a two-week timeline when faced with difficult decisions or contentious announcements. From tax reform and healthcare to Russia and North Korea, the former and current president has repeatedly promised action 'in two weeks' often without follow-through.
In recent months, he has used the same line in reference to trade deals, tariffs, and foreign policy decisions, including his response to the Russia-Ukraine war.
Eight weeks ago, when asked if he trusted Russian President Vladimir Putin, he responded, 'I'll let you know in about two weeks.'
This recurring pattern has raised questions about whether the 'two-week' window is meant as a negotiating tactic or a delay mechanism. In this case, it appears to have served as a smokescreen.
No longer peacemaker?
Trump once campaigned as the man who would bring America out of endless foreign entanglements. But six months into his second term, he has now led the United States directly into Israel's military campaign against Iran, ordering the strikes on three key nuclear sites.
Speaking from the White House, flanked by Vice-President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump warned Iran of more attacks if it failed to abandon its nuclear ambitions. 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,' he declared, moments after confirming that American forces had targeted Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan with bunker-buster bombs and Tomahawk missiles.
Trump's move marks a dramatic shift from his long-standing rhetoric. On the campaign trail and throughout his first term, he had vowed to end 'ridiculous endless wars' and reject the interventionism of past administrations. His 2024 campaign platform, dubbed 'Agenda 47', touted him as 'the only president who rejected the catastrophic advice of Washington's generals.'
MAGA backlash, Israeli praise
The decision has drawn sharp criticism from key figures in Trump's own 'America First' movement.
Many accuse him of abandoning his non-interventionist roots.
Steve Bannon said Israel had 'essentially forced President Trump's hand,' while right-wing podcaster Theo Von expressed disillusionment: 'It just feels like we're working for Israel.' Tucker Carlson said there was 'zero credible intelligence' justifying an attack on Iran's nuclear programme.
Critics also pointed to the political inconsistency.
Trump had repeatedly pledged to end 'endless wars' and called himself 'the only president in generations who didn't start a war.' As a candidate and in office, he derided America's foreign entanglements and claimed 'great nations do not fight endless wars.'
But with US B-2 bombers and submarines now involved, and Iran promising retaliation, his position as a 'peacemaker' is under strain.
'President Trump has clearly signalled, as he has all along, that he opposes a regime change war in Iran,' said media personality Jack Posobiec, attempting to frame the strike as narrowly targeted.
Yet many observers fear it may spark further escalation. The White House has not ruled out additional military action if Iran retaliates.
Fallout and what's next?
In his address, Trump warned that if Iran struck back, it would face 'force far greater than what was witnessed tonight.' Hours later, Iranian missiles were reported to have struck areas in Israel. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi vowed the US attacks 'will have everlasting consequences.'
Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed no radiation leaks at the sites and said assessments were ongoing.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' and warned of 'catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region and the world.' The Israeli military, too, announced it was preparing for a protracted war.
Trump, who left the G7 summit early to consult with advisers in Washington, now faces the challenge of containing the fallout. His swift decision has exposed deep divides within his base, invited international condemnation, and risked American lives in a volatile theatre.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
26 minutes ago
- Mint
US strike on Iran raises oil shock, capital flow risks for India's economy
New Delhi: The flare-up in West Asia following US missile strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities has heightened geopolitical tensions and intensified external risks to India's economy, even as many analysts say the escalation may prove short-lived. At stake for India is the potential fallout from surging oil prices, a widening current account deficit, higher energy and shipping costs fuelling domestic inflation, investor risk aversion, capital outflows, and broader risks to economic growth. 'The bigger impact will be on sentiment. However, oil intensity has been going down structurally. For India too, the share of oil imports in total imports has come down from 21% in 2018 to 16.5% in 2025," said Sachchidanand Shukla, group chief economist at Larsen & Toubro. Read this | Mint Primer: What if the US joins Israel's war with Iran? Shukla added that India can absorb oil prices up to $85 a barrel without triggering large macro imbalances. 'There is no need to panic and one needs to keep an eye on how the situation evolves," he said. In a televised address on Sunday (India time), US President Donald Trump confirmed the direct American assault on Iran's nuclear programme, ending days of speculation about Washington's entry into the Israel-Iran conflict. He warned that further strikes could follow. 'Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight was the most difficult of them all by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace doesn't come quickly we will go to those other targets with precision, speed and skill," Trump said. Oil price spike the immediate risk A sustained rise in oil prices remains the most visible risk for India, which relies on imports for nearly 85% of its crude oil needs. Higher global prices can widen India's current account deficit, fuel domestic inflation, trigger risk aversion among investors, and slow down growth. 'Every sustained 10% rise in oil price versus the baseline can lower India's GDP by 15 basis points (bps) and raise inflation measured by Consumer Price Index (CPI) by 30bps. On the other hand, it can reduce global GDP by 15 bps and raise CPI by 40 bps which can impede the rate cut trajectory," explained Shukla. While crude prices have already risen from $64–65 per barrel to $74–75 since the Israel-Iran conflict erupted on 13 June, some offsetting factors remain in play. Read this | US attack on Iranian nuclear sites roils oil market, India braces for possible price surge Experts noted that oil supply from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries Plus (Opec+) is improving as members unwind voluntary production cuts. Crude output from Opec+ rose by 180,000 barrels per day in May compared to April, according to the cartel's latest monthly oil market report. This production rebound, experts said, could help cap sharp price spikes, provided the conflict does not escalate further. 'The current flare-up may be short-lived and could even mark a turning point in the West Asia crisis towards its early closure, given the substantial disparity in conventional military capabilities, though the complex regional dynamics suggest multiple pathways for conflict evolution," said Rishi Shah, Partner and Economic Advisory Services Leader, Grant Thornton Bharat. 'As things stand today, there may be regional disturbances but these appear unlikely to translate into a major negative shock for India's economy," said Shah. On the trade front, while treaty negotiations continue, commercial flows seem to be adapting and progressing despite the tensions, he added. "Therefore, based on current developments and assuming the conflict remains contained, we expect the net external impact on India's growth trajectory to be relatively muted in the near term — though this assessment remains contingent on the conflict not escalating significantly or disrupting critical energy supply routes," said Shah. Prolonged conflict could hit growth Economists warn that a prolonged conflict could have deeper consequences. 'For oil-importing countries like India, this means slightly higher inflation and increased fiscal costs. While we have some buffer, with inflation currently below 4%, expectations have suddenly firmed up," said NR Bhanumurthy, director of the Madras School of Economics. Bhanumurthy cautioned that the current account deficit could widen not just due to the oil import bill, but also from potential pressure on remittances and capital flows. 'CAD will be a key concern going forward," he said, adding that fiscal support may be needed to absorb part of the oil price shock. 'A sustained flare-up in the conflict poses upside risks for estimates of crude oil prices, and India's net oil imports and the current account deficit. A $10/bbl increase in the average price of crude oil for the fiscal will typically push up net oil imports by ~$13-14 billion during the year, enlarging the CAD (current account deficit) by 0.3% of GDP," rating agency Icra Ltd had noted in an earlier report. Oil marketing companies and the government can absorb some of the costs in the short term, Bhanumurthy said. 'There will be fiscal implications, but we do have some fiscal space as we have exceeded fiscal targets in the last two years," he added. A sharp oil price rise could also weigh on foreign inflows and hurt domestic investment sentiment, he warned. A similar note of caution was sounded by Madan Sabnavis, chief economist at Bank of Baroda, who said that if crude prices stay above $80 for long, the trade deficit will widen and the rupee will come under pressure. "Wholesale inflation will rise accordingly, but the impact on retail inflation will depend on how the government manages fuel prices," he said, adding that excise cuts, if implemented to shield consumers, would widen the fiscal deficit — 'one that can be absorbed." India's current account deficit edged up to $11.5 billion, or 1.1% of GDP, in Q3 FY25 compared to $10.4 billion a year earlier. Retail inflation eased to 2.82% in May, while wholesale price inflation fell to a 14-month low of 0.39%. Icra Ratings on Friday warned that oil is expected to average between $70 and $80 per barrel in FY26, and any sustained rise beyond current levels could weigh on India's growth outlook. Shipping watches Hormuz chokepoint The Strait of Hormuz remains a key chokepoint for global energy and container trade, with Indian shipping companies monitoring the situation closely. 'But operations and movement of ships as of now has remained unaffected in the region. We have not yet received any alerts from either UK Maritime Trade Operations that patrols the area or the Indian Directorate General of Shipping," said Anil Devli, CEO, Indian National Shipowners' Association. Even before the latest flare-up, some ships had begun avoiding the strait, pushing up freight rates and crew costs amid rising security risks. Read this | Mint Explainer | Strait of Hormuz: Will Iran shut the vital oil artery of the world? Any blockade could spike global energy prices, disrupt supply chains, and hit container trade across the Persian Gulf, South Asia, and East Africa. India is also watching its strategic asset in the region — Chabahar Port in Iran — closely. 'Operations at the port, located near Iran's southeastern border with Pakistan, remain unaffected and normal," an India Ports Global Ltd official said. Meanwhile, Adani Group's Haifa Port in Israel remains fully functional despite the ongoing conflict. 'Earlier strikes caused minor shrapnel damage nearby, but operations were unaffected," another official said. Haifa handles over 30% of Israel's imports and contributes about 5% to Adani Ports' revenue, though it accounts for less than 2% of cargo volumes. Rice exporters brace for fallouts Beyond oil, India's basmati rice exporters are facing uncertainty as Iran, a key buyer, may scale back purchases if tensions persist. Iran typically imports around 1 million tonnes of basmati rice annually from India, accounting for roughly a fifth of India's total basmati exports by volume. Several shipments are currently lying at Indian ports, with exporters hesitant to dispatch consignments amid growing uncertainty. "We are in a catch-22 situation. Amid escalation of tension, many of the exporters, whose shipments are lying at port have kept shipments on hold. If the current situation persists, exporters would be on the receiving end," said Satish Goel, President, All India Rice Exporters Association (AIREA). India's rice exports to Iran rose to $757.3 million in FY25 from $689.8 million a year earlier, accounting for three-fourths of India's total farm exports to the country. Also read | Javier Blas: An Israel-Iran war may not rattle the oil market The timing makes the situation especially sensitive — mid-June to mid-July is peak season for exports, just ahead of Iran's domestic harvest. 'This is a peak season, as in the middle of July Iran might temporarily ban shipments to protect their domestic farmers and ensure fair prices for their harvest," Goel added. 'This is a common practice, particularly during the harvest season, and is aimed at supporting local agriculture by reducing competition from foreign imports. The ban is usually lifted once the domestic harvest is sold." Vijay C Roy and Dhirendra Kumar contributed to this story
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
27 minutes ago
- Business Standard
With Trump involved, wartime Nato summit may shift focus from Ukraine
At its first summits after Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Nato gave President Volodymyr Zelenskyy pride of place at its table. It won't be the same this time. Europe's biggest land conflict since World War II is now in its fourth year and still poses an existential threat to the continent. Ukraine continues to fight a war so that Europeans don't have to. Just last week, Russia launched one of the biggest drone attacks of the invasion on Kyiv. But things have changed. The Trump administration insists that it must preserve maneuvering space to entice Russian President Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table, so Ukraine must not be allowed steal the limelight. In Washington last year, the military alliance's weighty summit communique included a vow to supply long-term security assistance to Ukraine, and a commitment to back the country on its irreversible path" to Nato membership. The year before, a statement more than twice as long was published in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius. A new Nato-Ukraine Council was set up, and Kyiv's membership path fast-tracked. Zelenskyy received a hero's welcome at a concert downtown. It will be very different at a two-day summit in the Netherlands that starts Tuesday. Nato's most powerful member, the United States, is vetoing Ukraine's membership. It's unclear how long for. Zelenskyy is invited again, but will not be seated at Nato's table. The summit statement is likely to run to around five paragraphs, on a single page, Nato diplomats and experts say. Ukraine will only get a passing mention. If the G7 summit is anything to go by Recent developments do not augur well for Ukraine. Earlier this month, frustrated by the lack of a ceasefire agreement, US President Donald Trump said it might be best to let Ukraine and Russia fight for a while before pulling them apart and pursuing peace. Last weekend, he and Putin spoke by phone, mostly about Israel and Iran, but a little about Ukraine, too, Trump said. America has warned its allies that it has other security priorities, including in the Indo-Pacific and on its own borders. Then at the Group of Seven summit in Canada, Trump called for Russia to be allowed back into the group; a move that would rehabilitate Putin on the global stage. The next day, Russia launched its mass drone attack on Kyiv. Putin is doing this simply because he can afford to continue the war. He wants the war to go on. It is troubling when the powerful of this world turn a blind eye to it, Zelenskyy said. Trump left the G7 gathering early to focus on the conflict between Israel and Iran. Zelenskyy had travelled to Canada to meet with him. No meeting happened, and no statement on Russia or the war was agreed. Lacking unanimity, other leaders met with Zelenskyy to reassure him of their support. Questions about US support for Ukraine Trump wants to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. He said he could do it within 100 days, but that target has come and gone. Things are not going well, as a very public bust up with Zelenskyy at the White House demonstrated. Trump froze military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine's armed forces for a week. The US has stepped back from the Ukraine Defence Contact Group that was set up under the Biden administration and helped to drum up weapons and ammunition. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth skipped its last meeting; the first time a Pentagon chief has been absent since Russian forces invaded in February 2022. Addressing Congress on June 10, Hegseth also acknowledged that funding for Ukraine military assistance, which has been robust for the past two years, will be reduced in the upcoming defense budget. It means Kyiv will receive fewer of the weapons systems that have been key to countering Russia's attack. Indeed, no new aid packages have been approved for Ukraine since Trump took office again in January. The message from the administration is clear: Far from guaranteed, future U.S. support for Ukraine may be in jeopardy, said Riley McCabe, Associate Fellow at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, a US-based policy research organization. Cutting aid, McCabe warned, could make the Kremlin believe that US resolve is fleeting, and that time is on Russia's side. Putin has less incentive to negotiate if he believes that US disengagement is inevitable and that Russia will soon gain an advantage on the battlefield, he said. What the summit might mean for Kyiv Trump wants the summit to focus on defence spending. The 32 allies are expected to agree on an investment pledge that should meet his demands. Still, the Europeans and Canada are determined to keep a spotlight on the war, wary that Russia could set its sights on one of them next. They back Trump's ceasefire efforts with Putin but also worry that the two men are cozying up. Also, some governments may struggle to convince their citizens of the need to boost defense spending at the expense of other budget demands without a strong show of support for Ukraine and acknowledgement that Russia remains Nato's biggest security threat. The summit is highly symbolic for Ukraine in other ways. Zelenskyy wants to prevent his country from being sidelined from international diplomacy, but both he and his allies rely on Trump for US military backup against Russia. Concretely, Trump and his counterparts will dine with the Dutch King on Tuesday evening. Zelenskyy could take part. Elsewhere, foreign ministers will hold a Nato-Ukraine Council, the forum where Kyiv sits among the 32 allies as an equal to discuss its security concerns and needs. What is clear is that the summit will be short. One working session on Wednesday. It was set up that way to prevent the meeting from derailing. If the G7 is anything to go by, Trump's focus on his new security priorities right now, the conflict between Israel and Iran might make it even shorter.
Hindustan Times
31 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Donald Trump gave Iran two weeks, struck in two days. Here's why the US President didn't wait
US President Donald Trump warned Iran on Friday that it had up to two weeks to avoid possible military action. But just two days later, on Sunday, the US military hit key nuclear sites in Iran, dealing a major blow to the country's nuclear programme. U.S. President Donald Trump delivers an address to the nation accompanied by U.S. Vice President JD Vance, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. June 21, 2025, following U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/Pool(REUTERS) However, a report by Axios said Trump was exploring the option of talks between US and Iranian officials before deciding to send ground troops. Follow Israel-Iran conflict live updates. The proposal was from Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who gave a call to Trump earlier this week when the US President was meeting with G7 leaders in Canada. Trump also reportedly received 'signals' for back-channel talks from Iran. Not only was Trump willing to send Vice President JD Vance and White House envoy Steve Witkoff to Turkey for the talks, according to Axios, he even offered to attend the talks himself if need be. This proposal for talks was conveyed to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi by Erdogan. Both Iranian officials reportedly tried reaching Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with the proposal but couldn't. Khamenei went into hiding into a secure underground bunker, fearing an assassination attempt. After the Iranian officials failed to reach him, they informed Turkey, who then told the US that talks would not happen. Days after the meeting was called off, Erdogan reportedly met Araghchi in Istanbul and urged him to hold talks with the US, assuring that Turkey was willing to arrange it. The same day, B-2 stealth bombers departed from the US airbase in Missouri, and later struck three key nuclear sites – Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan, in Iran. Using the B-2 stealth bombers and bunker-buster bombs, the US joined its ally Israel in the fight against Iran's nuclear ambitions. Ever since the Iran-Israel conflict began on June 13, Trump had been warning Tehran to back down and 'come to their senses' about their nuclear plans. As he announced the US military operation in Iran, Trump said a full payload of bombs were dropped on Fordow, a nuclear site very important to Iran, and considered impenetrable by Israeli bombs. 'There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!" Trump said in a Truth Social post. Even as Trump asked "Middle East bully" Iran to come to peace following the strikes, Iran has said it reserves the right to defend itself against the "grave violation".
