Follow us on social

google cta
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
google cta
google cta

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)
google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.