New Details Revealed: Why Trump Chose Not To Strike Iran This Week
As late as Wednesday morning, officials across Washington and the Middle East were bracing for the possibility that President Donald Trump was about to authorize sweeping U.S. airstrikes against Iran, according to a Washington Post report published today that detailed how the decision ultimately shifted.
Although Trump had not yet signed off on an attack, senior national security officials believed approval was imminent and were preparing for an extended operation as tensions mounted.
The sense of urgency intensified after Trump posted a message directed at Iranian protesters on Tuesday morning, writing, “HELP IS ON ITS WAY,” and encouraging them to “take over” regime institutions. Many American and foreign officials read the message as a precursor to military action, even as Trump continued evaluating non-military pressure to force Tehran to halt its crackdown on demonstrators.
The trajectory changed on Wednesday, when Trump was informed by envoy Steve Witkoff that Iran had called off plans to execute 800 prisoners, according to a senior U.S. official.
“We’re going to watch and see,” Trump told reporters from the Oval Office. U.S. intelligence agencies confirmed the following day that the executions did not occur, the official said.
That midweek reversal unsettled some of Trump’s advisers and disappointed Iranian dissidents, reflecting the intense domestic and international forces shaping the president’s thinking. According to interviews conducted by The Washington Post with more than a dozen current and former U.S. and Middle Eastern officials, the discussions involved sensitive diplomacy and ongoing military readiness. The officials spoke anonymously.
Administration officials said Trump grappled with the danger of further destabilizing an already volatile region and with practical limits on U.S. military capacity. Pentagon leaders were uneasy that after Trump ordered an aircraft carrier strike group to the Caribbean, American forces in the Middle East were not optimally positioned to counter an expected Iranian retaliation.
Israeli officials shared those concerns, noting that Israel had depleted significant interceptor missile stockpiles during a 12-day confrontation with Iran in June, according to one current and one former U.S. official.
Major U.S. partners in the region — including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt — pressed Washington to slow down and pursue diplomacy, a senior Arab diplomat and a Gulf official said. Though these Sunni-majority states view Iran as a strategic threat, they were more alarmed by the prospect of a wider regional conflict.
Several officials said Trump also assessed the likelihood of economic fallout, escalation into broader war, and risks to roughly 30,000 U.S. troops stationed in the region. Those dangers, they noted, bore little resemblance to the limited “one and done” missions Trump had previously approved.
“He wants [operations like] Venezuela,” said a former U.S. official briefed on the internal deliberations. “This was going to be messier.”
While military action has been paused for now, Trump and his team have not ruled it out entirely as the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group makes its way toward the Middle East, according to The Post. As of Friday, the carrier was in the South China Sea and remained more than a week from arrival, officials said.
Within the administration, opinions varied sharply. Vice President JD Vance favored strikes, contending that Trump needed to follow through on warnings to Iran about killing protesters. CIA Director John Ratcliffe showed Trump video evidence of regime brutality against demonstrators, though it was unclear whether he pushed for military intervention.
Other senior advisers urged restraint. Witkoff and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles cautioned against escalation, while Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent argued that existing sanctions should be given time to take effect. Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stayed at the White House throughout the day as options were reviewed.
After weighing the military plans, Trump decided the potential gains did not justify the risks. “Would a strike have resulted in regime change? The answer is clearly ‘no,’” said an individual close to the administration. “The negative impact of any attack outweighed any benefit.”
As U.S. forces repositioned, Iran reached out to Washington. A message from Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to Witkoff “kind of also defused the situation,” according to the same individual. Trump later said he had been informed the executions would stop, telling reporters, “I greatly respect the fact that they canceled.”
Arab governments — including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Oman, and Egypt — continued to press for diplomatic solutions.
Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu also urged caution, the report said, warning that Israel was not fully prepared to defend itself without substantial U.S. naval backing. U.S. officials confirmed that the two leaders spoke twice.
In the end, a combination of diplomatic pressure and uncertainty about the consequences of military action led Trump to hold off. Vance ultimately accepted the decision, according to a person familiar with the discussions.
Officials cautioned that the option of strikes could return to the table within two to three weeks, once additional U.S. military assets reach the region. In the meantime, U.S. Central Command has been instructed to prepare for continuous high-level operations “for the next month,” signaling that the standoff remains unresolved.
{Matzav.com}
