President Donald Trump has told advisers that if diplomacy or any initial targeted US attack does not lead Iran to give in to his demands that it give up its nuclear programme, he will consider a much bigger attack in coming months intended to drive that country’s leaders from power, people briefed on internal administration deliberations said.
Negotiators from the US and Iran are scheduled to meet in Geneva on Thursday for what appears to be last-ditch negotiations to avoid a military conflict. But Trump has been weighing options for US action if the negotiations fail.
Though no final decisions have been made, advisers said, Trump has been leaning towards conducting an initial strike in coming days intended to demonstrate to Iran’s leaders that they must be willing to agree to give up the ability to make a nuclear weapon.
Targets under consideration range from the headquarters of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to the country’s nuclear sites to the ballistic missile programme.
Should those steps fail to convince Tehran to meet his demands, Trump told advisers, he would leave open the possibility of a military assault later this year intended to help topple Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader.
There are doubts even inside the administration about whether that goal can be accomplished with airstrikes alone. And behind the scenes, a new proposal is being considered by both sides that could create an off-ramp to military conflict: a very limited nuclear enrichment programme that Iran could carry out solely for purposes of medical research and treatments.
It is unclear whether either side would agree. But the last-minute proposal comes as two aircraft carrier groups and dozens of fighter jets, bombers and refuelling aircraft are now massing within striking distance of Iran.
Trump discussed plans for strikes on Iran in the White House Situation Room on Wednesday. The meeting included Vice-President J.D. Vance; secretary of state Marco Rubio; Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; the CIA director, John Ratcliffe; and Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff.
This article is based on conversations with multiple American officials with knowledge of the meeting.
During the meeting, Trump pressed General Caine and Ratcliffe to weigh in on the broader strategy in Iran, but neither official generally advocates a certain policy position. General Caine discussed what the military could do from an operational standpoint, and Ratcliffe preferred to discuss the current situation on the ground and possible outcomes of proposed operations.
Vance, who has long called for more restraint in overseas military action, did not oppose a strike, but he intensely questioned General Caine and Ratcliffe in the meeting. He pressed them to share their opinions of the options and wanted more of a discussion of the risks and complexity of carrying out a strike against Iran.
Earlier, the US had been considering options that included putting teams of special operations forces on the ground that could carry out raids to destroy Iranian nuclear or missile facilities. That included manufacturing and enrichment operations buried far below the surface, outside the range of American conventional munitions.
But any such raid would be highly dangerous, requiring special operations forces to be on the ground far longer than they were for the raid to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Multiple US officials said that for now, the plans for a commando raid had been shelved.
Army, navy and air Force officials have also raised concerns about the impact that a protracted war with Iran, or just remaining poised for such a conflict, could have on the readiness of Navy ships, scarce Patriot antimissile defences, and overstretched transport and surveillance planes.
The White House declined to comment on Trump’s decision making.
New York Times News Service
