Follow us on social

Donald Trump

Report: Incoming Trump officials mulling attack on Iran

This conflicts with other voices, including the incoming vice president, who have urged restraint

Reporting | QiOSK

Senior advisers for President-elect Trump’s transition team are weighing whether to launch military strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, according to a new report in the Wall Street Journal.

Although relevant deliberations are in early stages, the Journal reports that Trump’s allies and advisers view that Iran’s weakened state, with its ally Syria out and partners Hamas and Hezbollah critically undermined by Israel, presents a “rare opportunity to counter Iran’s nuclear buildup.”

The development follows previous hawkish statements on Iran from both Trump and some White House picks, including national security adviser designee Mike Waltz's recent comments that the incoming Trump administration would embark on a policy of “maximum pressure" against Iran.

“We have to constrain their cash. We have to constrain their oil. We have to go back to maximum pressure, number one, which was working under the first Trump administration,” Waltz said.

On the campaign trail back in September, Trump said he would threaten to “blow [Iran] to smithereens” if a presidential candidate faced threats from Tehran or another “threatening country.” (American intelligence officials had briefed Trump on alleged Iranian threats to assassinate him).

When asked about the prospects of going to war with Iran during an interview with TIME this week, Trump said “anything can happen. It’s a very volatile situation.”

Some incoming Trump officials and associates may believe that attacking Iran may deter its nuclear prospects. But disarmament experts say that striking Iran would likely galvanize it, making it more likely to develop nuclear weapons in response to a military attack.

Iranian officials have repeatedly denied interest in acquiring nuclear weapons Indeed, as Iranian former foreign minister Kamal Kharrazi said regarding possible Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities: “We have no decision to produce a nuclear bomb, but if Iran is threatened, we will have to change our nuclear doctrine.” And Javad Zarif, Iran’s vice president for strategic affairs, recently wrote in Foreign Affairs that Iran’s new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, “is ready to manage tensions with the United States.”

On one hand, Trump's Iran policy remains pliable as administration positions are finalized and discussions with regional players occur. Meanwhile, some of Trump’s top aides have signaled willingness towards restraint. Back in October, J.D. Vance, now vice president-elect, said “our interest very much is in not going to war with Iran…this is where smart diplomacy really matters.” And Elon Musk, a top Trump confidant, also reportedly met with Iranian diplomats at the U.N. last month in an apparent effort to diffuse tensions.

But many Washington hawks smell an opportunity and are pushing the incoming Trump administration to take a hard line. “I have, for a long time, been willing to call quite unequivocally for regime change in Iran," Sen. Ted Cruz said recently.

Others are hoping that Trump will stick to his instincts on refraining from further involving the U.S. military in more wars, especially in the Middle East and particularly with Iran. “Despite the chaos of his first term, Trump says he still wants a deal,” NIAC president Jamal Abdi recently noted in RS, adding though, that “Trump’s instinct to negotiate is likely to run headlong into his elevation of hawkish advisers who don’t believe in negotiations.”


Top Image Credit: Donald Trump (White House photo)
Reporting | QiOSK
Russia Navy United Kingdom Putin Starmer
Top Photo: Russian small missile ships Sovetsk and Grad sail along the Neva river during a rehearsal for the Navy Day parade, in Saint Petersburg, Russia July 21, 2024. REUTERS/Anton Vaganov

How Russia’s naval rearmament has gone unnoticed

Europe

Today, there are only three global naval powers: the United States, China, and Russia. The British Royal Navy is, sadly, reduced to a small regional naval power, able occasionally to deploy further afield. If Donald Trump wants European states to look after their own collective security, Britain might be better off keeping its handful of ships in the Atlantic.

European politicians and journalists talk constantly about the huge challenge in countering an apparently imminent Russian invasion, should the U.S. back away from NATO under President Trump. With Russia’s Black Sea fleet largely confined to the eastern Black Sea during the war, although still able to inflict severe damage on Ukraine, few people talk about the real Russian naval capacity to challenge Western dominance. Or, indeed, how this will increasingly come up against U.S. naval interests in the Pacific and, potentially, in the Arctic.

keep readingShow less
Senator Rand Paul
Top photo credit: Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky ( Maxim Elramsisy/Shutterstock)

Rand Paul blasts away at antisemitism speech bill

Washington Politics

In President Donald Trump’s first 100 days, his administration has arrested and detained, without due process, visa holders and other non-citizens in the U.S. for speaking out against Israel’s military actions in Gaza.

That’s not how the administration frames it, but that is the connective tissue in each of the cases.

keep readingShow less
Volodymyr Zelenskiy and Donald Trump
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and U.S. President Donald Trump meet, while they attend the funeral of Pope Francis, at the Vatican April 26, 2025. Ukrainian Presidential Press Service/Handout via REUTERS

US, Ukraine minerals deal: A tactical win, not a turning point

Europe

The U.S.-Ukraine minerals agreement is not a diplomatic breakthrough and will not end the war, but it is a significant success for Ukraine, both in the short term and — if it is ever in fact implemented — in the longer term.

It reportedly does not get Ukraine the security “guarantees” that Kyiv has been asking for. It does not commit the U.S. to fight for Ukraine, or to back up a European “reassurance force” for Ukraine. And NATO membership remains off the table. Given its basic positions, there is no chance of the Trump administration shifting on these points.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.