Trump's Iran Decision: Inside the Escalating Tensions

The decision by President Donald Trump to embrace military action against Iran was driven largely by the persistent lobbying of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was determined to end the diplomatic negotiations that had constrained Iran's nuclear program.

Few of the president's advisers voiced opposition to the move, reflecting the shift in US foreign policy toward a more hawkish stance on Iran under the Trump administration. The episode underscores how the influence of foreign leaders and the absence of robust internal debate can shape the president's most consequential decisions.

The tensions with Iran had been building for months, fueled by a series of attacks on oil tankers in the Persian Gulf and the downing of a US surveillance drone. But it was Netanyahu's aggressive lobbying that ultimately pushed Trump to approve a military strike, which he later called off at the last minute.

Netanyahu had long argued that the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran was flawed and needed to be renegotiated or scrapped altogether. He had actively campaigned against the agreement during the Obama administration and continued to press the issue with Trump, who ultimately withdrew the US from the deal in 2018.

With the diplomatic process stalled, Netanyahu saw an opportunity to push for a more confrontational approach. He repeatedly called for the US to take action against Iran, warning that Tehran was continuing to pursue nuclear weapons and was a threat to Israel and the wider region.

Trump, who had campaigned on a promise to be tougher on Iran than his predecessors, was receptive to Netanyahu's appeals. The president's national security team, which included several Iran hawks, also supported the decision to launch a military strike, at least initially.

But the absence of strong opposition within the administration meant that Trump's decision to approve the strike was made with little internal debate or discussion of the potential consequences. This dynamic, which has characterized much of Trump's foreign policy, has raised concerns among some experts about the president's ability to make well-informed decisions on complex global issues.

In the end, Trump's decision to call off the strike at the last minute was driven by his own doubts about the wisdom of the action and concerns about potential civilian casualties. But the episode has left many wondering about the long-term implications of the president's approach to Iran and the influence of foreign leaders on US foreign policy.