Donald Trump’s changing rhetoric on Iran intervention

Good morning and welcome to White House Watch. Let’s get right into:

Will he or won’t he? 

Yesterday Donald Trump made his most *** comments yet about possible US military action against Iran, saying that the next week would be “very big” in determining the course of the Iran war — and whether the US would get involved.

“I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I’m going to do,” the president said at the White House.

Later in the Oval Office, he told reporters that “I have ideas as to what to do, but I haven’t made a final, I like to make a final decision one second before it’s due . . . because things change . . . especially with war”.

Trump has huddled with his advisers in the Situation Room twice in the past two days, and has a third meeting planned later this morning.

As he weighs striking Iran alongside Israel, he will also be considering how Tehran might retaliate.

Possible responses could include direct attacks on US forces or diplomatic missions in the Middle East, cyber attacks, terrorist acts, strikes by Tehran’s proxies in the region, or disruption to shipments of oil and gas from the Gulf, former national security officials told me.

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has warned Washington of “irreparable damage” if the US joins Israel in attacking the Islamic state.

Iran is “prepared now” for a counterstrike against the US, and has a “range of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones” that it could use to hit American bases and ships, former Air Force secretary Frank Kendall told me.

But that did not mean it would do so immediately, he added. That was “an escalation question” for the Iranians, he said, and “a calculation of what additional attacks would be remounted if they responded” to the US.

A US strike also poses a political risk for Trump. There’s a fierce battle playing out publicly on the right, with the president’s supporters divided on what he should do.

Maga supremo Steve Bannon said yesterday that “we can’t do this again. We’ll tear the country apart. We can’t have another Iraq”.

The former chief strategist to Trump said: “My mantra right now: the Israelis have to finish what they started. They started this. They should finish it.”

Follow the latest developments on the Israel-Iran conflict at our live blog.

The latest headlines

• The Federal Reserve cut its outlook for the US economy, with policymakers split on whether they would be able to reduce interest rates at all this year.

• Foreign investors’ stockpile of US government debt fell only modestly in April despite turbulence in the Treasury market driven by “liberation day”.

• US residential construction dropped to a five-year low in May, as homebuilders grappled with Trump’s tariffs, high mortgage rates and excess inventory.

• The president plans to sign an executive order to delay for a third time the US ban on TikTok, as the Chinese-owned social media app approaches a deadline to divest a stake in the platform to satisfy American law.

What we’re hearing

So what would a US strike on Iran actually look like? [Free to read]

The most likely scenario is that the US would strike Fordow, that critical nuclear facility under a mountain we were talking about on Tuesday.

I had a chat with retired four-star general Joseph Votel, the former head of US Central Command, which is responsible for US military operations in the Middle East. He told me:

In order to deliver this thing, we have to make sure that we’re operating in an environment where we kind of control all the variables [such as] air defence systems of the Iranians or electronic warfare, things [that] can be suppressed.

The US would drop GBU-57 Mblockive Ordnance Penetrator bombs, also called “bunker busters”, which can only be carried by stealth B-2 bombers. Each plane can carry two of the 30,000-pound mega bombs.

“There are fairly significant but not insurmountable logistics” for the Pentagon and Centcom, Votel said.

The US would be likely to get four or five B-2 bombers over to the US-UK base on Diego Garcia — enough to carry out the mission and have backup aircraft ready, Votel said. B-2 bombers would be joined by other jets, including ones outfitted with GPS — or laser-guided munitions, to carry out the strike. 

The US has already deployed air-to-air refuelling aircraft — essentially flying jet fuel tanks — to Europe that could fill up US or Israeli planes on the strike mission. 

The B-2s would probably drop multiple bombs on Fordow: “Our targeting process is to target, blockess and then retarget”, Votel said.

Viewpoints

• As Trump makes a fateful choice on Iran, the US president risks being dragged into another regime change folly in the Middle East, writes our editorial board.

• Nippon Steel’s $15bn deal for US Steel introduces the era of “stick-holder capitalism”, which doesn’t fully serve shareholders’ interests, says Leo Lewis.

• As Trump warms to the idea of using US military might against Iran, there are signs that the anti-war right is linking up with the anti-war left, writes Gideon Rachman.

• US exceptionalism has not disappeared, but it may be shifting significantly, argues Grace Peters, co-global head of investment strategy for JPMorgan Private Bank.

• As some investors worry that US economic institutions are being eroded, former central banker Raghuram Rajan reminds readers that strong institutions don’t fix broken politics.