About a month ago, from the stage of an investment forum in Saudi Arabia, US President Donald Trump issued a warning to Iran that would prove to be prophetic.
"We will never allow America and our allies to be threatened by terrorism or nuclear attack," Trump told the audience, sending a clear message to the leadership in Tehran. "Now is the time for them to choose. Right now. We don't have much time to wait. Things are moving very quickly."
That ultimatum of May 13th went almost unnoticed at the time.
However, behind the scenes, the president already knew that an attack on Iran could be imminent, and that he might not be able to do much to prevent it, according to two US officials.
By mid-May, the Pentagon had already begun preparing detailed contingency plans to help Israel in the event it carried out its long-standing ambition to attack Iran’s nuclear program, officials said. Also, according to a Western source familiar with the situation and a Ukrainian source, the United States had already diverted thousands of defensive weapons from war-torn Ukraine to the Middle East in preparation for a possible conflict.
This reconstruction of events in the weeks and days leading up to Trump's decision to support Israel's bombing campaign is based on interviews with more than a dozen administration officials, foreign diplomats and close Trump aides, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of internal discussions.
A picture emerges of a long, secretive process of preparations and of a president who was torn for weeks between diplomacy and support for military action, and who was ultimately partially persuaded by an ally whose moves he could not fully control.
Although Trump has long portrayed himself as a peacemaker, repeatedly sending his special envoy for the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, in an attempt to reach a diplomatic agreement, several of his trusted political allies insisted on supporting an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.
US intelligence indicated that a unilateral Israeli attack was possible, even likely, even if Trump wanted to wait, two US officials said.
While it is not entirely clear whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Trump's more belligerent allies managed to force his agreement to the Israeli plans, in the days leading up to the attack, Trump, according to two senior US officials and a senior Israeli source, was at least not against it.
Such an attitude, said those familiar with the relationship, contributed to Israel deciding to take action.
Seven days into the conflict between Israel and Iran, Trump faces a dilemma, said Aaron David Miller, a veteran diplomat who has advised six US secretaries of state on Middle East policy.
He can try again to reach a diplomatic solution with Iran, he can allow Iran and Israel to "deal with each other," or he can enter the war by launching US airstrikes on the deep-seated uranium enrichment facility at Fordow - a move that would have unknown consequences for the entire region.
"Trump allowed (the Israeli attack) to happen," Miller said.
The White House announced on Thursday that Trump would make a decision on whether to involve the US in the conflict within the next two weeks.
Storm on the horizon
One of the first hints that Trump might approve an Israeli bombing campaign appeared in April.
During a closed-door meeting on April 17, Saudi Arabia's defense minister delivered a clear message to Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian: take Trump's offer of negotiations seriously, as it represents a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel.
Reuters could not determine whether the message was sent at Washington's request, or whether Iranian leaders actually took it seriously. Judging by what followed, they should have.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and the commander of US Central Command, General Michael Eric Kurila, discussed a detailed intelligence analysis of Iran's missile arsenal and nuclear program, as well as steps that might be needed to protect US troops and Israel itself in the event of a conflict with Iran, according to a senior US and Israeli official.
Meanwhile, the US has been sending weapons to Israel that would be useful in a potential air war with Iran. In one case in early May, a large shipment of defensive missiles originally intended for Ukraine was diverted to Israel, Western and Ukrainian sources say.
The redeployed contingent has caused discontent in Kiev and further heightened fears that additional weapons, needed to defend against Moscow, could be used to defend American interests elsewhere, a Ukrainian source said.
In the first months of Trump's term, Israel had already proposed to Washington a number of options for attacking Iranian facilities, sources said.
Although Trump has dismissed the idea, saying he currently favors diplomacy, several people close to him say he has never been adamantly opposed to using military force against Iran. He has done so before. In 2020, during his first term, despite a foreign policy characterized by restraint, Trump ordered a drone strike that killed Major General Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps' international operations unit.
US prosecutors later alleged that the Iranian government had attempted to assassinate Trump in retaliation, a charge Tehran denies. Behind the scenes, Trump was torn between different factions on Iran even before he took office.
On the one hand, many of his supporters, including conservative media commentator Tucker Carlson, as well as some administration officials, viewed Trump's MAGA movement as a panacea against decades of foreign wars that had claimed thousands of American lives without significantly advancing American interests.
On the other hand, several of Trump's close allies, from conservative commentator Mark Levin to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, have presented a nuclear Iran as an existential threat that must be eliminated at all costs.
Trump himself has proudly touted his role as a peacemaker. "My greatest political legacy," he said during his inauguration, "will be that of a peacemaker and a unifier."
Green light
In the end, no US official, Trump aide or diplomat Reuters spoke to pointed to a watershed moment or "enlightenment" that would have determined Trump's decision.
A senior administration official said that after months of hesitation, the lack of diplomatic progress, pressure from Israel and appeals from hard-line allies had likely exhausted Trump enough to give in.
Trump's aides and allies pointed out that the Israeli attack occurred just after the expiration of a 60-day deadline set by the Trump administration for achieving a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran.
The senior US official cited another factor: With intelligence consistently indicating that Israel could carry out an attack with or without US support, there was a risk that the administration would be caught off guard if it stood aside. Worse, it could have given the impression that the US was opposing a long-time ally.
Although Trump at one point appeared to ignore Netanyahu while publicly pushing for a peaceful resolution to the crisis, it was clear to Israel that Washington would stand by him, another official said.
When Trump spoke with Netanyahu on Monday, June 9, in one of his many phone calls, his attitude was, according to one American and one Israeli official, one of tacit, if not overt, acquiescence.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump said he would like more time for diplomacy, but a US official said he never explicitly vetoed Israeli plans.
By Wednesday, June 11, it became clear to Washington that Israel had moved to implement its plans.
On the same day, Reuters reported that the US was preparing to partially evacuate its embassy in Iraq due to fears of Iranian retaliation following the impending attack.
A day later, on June 12, Washington sent an official diplomatic note to several regional allies, warning them that an attack was imminent.
That evening, Israel launched a night attack.
Trump and several key cabinet members watched the events live from the "JFK Room," a section of the White House command center. Other officials were in adjacent rooms, also monitoring the situation.
On the menu, according to an official, were stone crabs from a local restaurant.
The initial strike appeared to be successful, killing several close advisers to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and severely damaging key nuclear facilities. Over the weekend, the Israelis considered killing Khamenei himself, but Trump talked them out of it, according to two US officials.
Almost immediately after the attack, a political civil war erupted within Trump's Republican Party, with several prominent conservatives, including members of Congress, accusing his administration of fanning the flames of war.
Seven days later, the US intelligence community believes the attacks have set back Iran's nuclear ambitions by just a few months, according to a source familiar with US intelligence reports.
Most analysts believe that a significant blow to Iran's nuclear program would require the use of bombs to destroy bunkers at the Fordow fuel enrichment facility - the "crown jewel" of Iran's nuclear program. Only the US has that capability.
Trump has stated that he is considering such an attack, which would constitute a serious escalation.
Prepared by: NB
Bonus video:
