US President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that he would make a crucial decision regarding military action against Iran within the next two weeks. His statement came amid mounting speculation about whether the US would join Israel in military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Trump’s announcement followed intense discussions within the White House about the escalating conflict between Iran and Israel. Although reports indicated that Iran had sought to send officials to Washington for nuclear negotiations, Tehran denied any such request, leaving the situation clouded in ambiguity.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt relayed the president’s message, emphasizing that, despite the urgency, there was still a “substantial” chance for negotiations. “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, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,” Trump said.
Trump’s two-week deadline mirrors similar timelines he has set in the past, including on topics like the Russia-Ukraine conflict. However, Leavitt dismissed suggestions that the president was simply stalling. “If there’s a chance for diplomacy, the president’s always going to grab it, but he’s not afraid to use strength as well,” she stated.
The White House has stressed that the situation remains fluid. Leavitt underscored the urgency of the matter, stating that Iran could develop a nuclear weapon within a “couple of weeks” if it chose to do so. Tehran, however, has consistently denied any intentions of pursuing nuclear weapons, asserting that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.
Rising Tensions in the Middle East
In recent days, Trump has been caught between advocating for diplomacy and supporting Israel’s aggressive stance towards Iran. His administration has given strong backing to Israeli airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, marking a sharp contrast with his earlier focus on negotiating a new nuclear deal with Tehran.
A key factor in this debate is the US’s unparalleled military capabilities, including its exclusive possession of the “bunker buster” bombs capable of targeting Iran’s heavily fortified Fordo nuclear enrichment plant. “We have capabilities that no other country on this planet possesses,” said Leavitt, referencing the US’s strategic advantage in the conflict.
Despite the military options on the table, some of Trump’s key supporters, including prominent figures from the “Make America Great Again” movement such as commentator Tucker Carlson and former aide Steve Bannon, have expressed opposition to military action. The US president’s pledge to withdraw from “forever wars” in the Middle East played a central role in both his 2016 and 2024 election victories, making any decision on military strikes particularly delicate.
Diplomacy in Play
Although Trump has publicly entertained the idea of military strikes, there is still a possibility for diplomacy to take precedence. Leavitt confirmed that while Iran and the US have engaged in ongoing “correspondence” since Israeli airstrikes targeted Iran, there are no current plans for the US to participate in European diplomatic talks scheduled for later this week in Geneva.
As President Trump prepares for an upcoming NATO summit in the Netherlands next week, the two-week deadline could mark a pivotal moment in the ongoing Middle East tensions. Trump is set to continue meeting daily with his top national security team until his departure, ensuring that every possible avenue, including diplomacy, is explored before a final decision is made.
Public Trust in Trump’s Leadership
Leavitt concluded by reaffirming the administration’s confidence in Trump’s decision-making, urging Americans to “trust” in the president’s instincts. “President Trump has incredible instincts,” Leavitt said, echoing the sentiments of many of his supporters.
As the world waits to see whether the US will escalate its involvement in the Iran conflict, all eyes remain on the next two weeks as Trump faces one of the most consequential decisions of his presidency.