Just four days after President Donald Trump made headlines by abruptly departing a summit of global leaders in Canada, he has ignited discussions about potential conflict with Iran. During a recent statement, the president urged civilians to “evacuate Tehran,” fueling speculation about the possibility of war. However, as of Friday, Trump indicated that he still needed more time to make a decision regarding U.S. actions towards Iran. He expressed that he was waiting to see “whether or not people come to their senses,” and refrained from committing to a ceasefire amidst ongoing negotiations.
As he prepared to attend a fundraiser at his New Jersey golf club, Trump took time to reiterate the perceived threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program. However, he avoided discussing any specific U.S. responses that could arise. Instead, much of his Friday was spent diverting public attention to other matters, including his plan for a “One Big Beautiful Bill.” He also called for a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election and commented on the Justice Department's charges against him, indicating a desire to shift the narrative away from Iran.
In recent days, a fierce battle for Trump’s attention has emerged, with influential voices vying for his ear. Trump has engaged in talks with various prominent figures who have provided contrasting opinions on how to approach Iran. According to insiders, this counsel has influenced Trump’s conflicting feelings regarding Iran; he firmly believes that Iran must not develop a nuclear weapon, yet he seeks to avoid military conflict—an integral part of his political philosophy.
On Thursday, Trump chose to buy himself more time, announcing that he would wait up to two weeks to make a decision about potential military action. His lunch meeting with Stephen K. Bannon, a former adviser and a significant figure in the MAGA movement, was particularly notable. Bannon criticized pro-Israel advocates for creating a false sense of urgency around military action against Iran. Alongside Bannon, right-wing influencer Jack Posobiec also cautioned against rushing into conflict, likening hawkish advisers to used car salesmen.
Following his lunch with Bannon, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt conveyed a message that Trump was committed to allowing negotiations with Iran to unfold. “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,” she stated, reflecting Trump's cautious approach.
Despite the MAGA opposition to military action against Iran, there remains a strong faction within the Republican Party that advocates for a more aggressive stance. While European diplomats continue to explore negotiations with Iran, the talks have yet to yield significant breakthroughs. A recent meeting in Geneva highlighted the divide, with European leaders pushing for limits on Iran’s nuclear program, while Iran insists that it will not engage until Israel ceases its military actions.
When asked about the effectiveness of European negotiations, Trump expressed skepticism, stating, “Iran doesn’t want to speak to Europe. They want to speak to us.” This remark underscores Trump’s belief that the U.S. remains the key player in resolving issues with Iran. He also reiterated his position that Iran should not obtain a nuclear weapon, a stance he has maintained throughout his political career.
As the diplomatic process evolves, Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, has kept communication lines open with Iranian officials. This willingness to pursue dialogue contrasts sharply with the urgency projected earlier in the week, when pro-intervention voices urged Trump to consider military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities and government.
As Trump navigates this precarious situation, he faces pressure from both hawkish Republicans calling for military intervention and those advocating for diplomacy. His upcoming decision on how to address Iran will hold significant implications for U.S. foreign policy and regional stability. With the timeline set for two weeks, the world watches closely as the president weighs his options amid a landscape of conflicting advice and urgent diplomatic efforts.
