In a move that has sent ripples across the Middle East and Washington’s foreign policy circles, US President Donald Trump has reportedly rejected an Israeli proposal to launch a massive military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. According to a New York Times report published on April 16, Israeli officials had prepared a detailed plan to strike key nuclear sites in Iran in early May. However, the White House, following internal deliberations, declined to endorse or participate in the operation.

This decision underscores a notable shift in Trump’s approach to the Iran issue-opting for a revived diplomatic path rather than a dramatic show of military force that could plunge the region into a broader war.

According to senior White House officials quoted by the NYT, Israel’s plan involved an “extensive bombing campaign” over the course of more than a week. The intent was to significantly set back Iran’s nuclear capabilities, potentially delaying its ability to develop a nuclear weapon by at least a year. The operation, a mix of airstrikes and special forces raids, was crafted with the expectation that the US would not only approve but provide logistical and possibly direct military support.

Israel’s sense of urgency was reportedly fueled by recent intelligence assessments indicating Iran had accelerated uranium enrichment activities and was nearing weapons-grade levels. These developments have reignited fears in Tel Aviv and among hawkish US policy circles that Iran is edging closer to nuclear breakout capability.

Yet the plan was halted in its tracks. Trump, who built a tough-on-Iran reputation during his first term by pulling the US out of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), appears to have reversed course. In the words of one senior official quoted anonymously, “The president wants a deal, not another war in the Middle East.”

The White House deliberations reportedly resulted in a “rough consensus” that attacking Iran now would be both strategically reckless and politically costly. Among those advising caution were Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard-all key figures in Trump’s second-term national security team.

They warned that US participation in an Israeli-led strike could lead to retaliatory attacks not only on Israel but also on American military assets across the region. US forces in Iraq, Syria, and the Gulf states would become immediate targets. The specter of a regional war-possibly dragging in Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Shiite militias in Iraq, and even elements in Yemen-loomed large in the discussions.

According to reports, Trump was persuaded by the argument that diplomacy, though slow and uncertain, could yield better results than igniting another long-term conflict in a volatile region already teetering on the edge.

The decision marks a stunning reversal for Trump, who in his first term proudly dismantled the JCPOA, accusing Tehran of cheating and pursuing a clandestine nuclear weapons program. His administration imposed a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign, crippling the Iranian economy but failing to coerce Tehran back to the negotiating table.

Iran, in turn, began rolling back its own commitments under the deal, exceeding uranium enrichment limits and restricting international inspections. The result was a tense standoff, marked by sporadic confrontations, including the US assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in 2020 and retaliatory Iranian missile strikes on US bases in Iraq.

But since returning to office, Trump appears to have recalibrated his stance. In March, he issued a blunt warning to Iran: “Make a deal or get bombed.” Yet despite the rhetoric, his administration has quietly initiated backchannel communications with Tehran.

On April 12, American and Iranian negotiators held their first round of formal talks in Oman, reportedly in a “productive, calm and positive atmosphere,” according to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. While details remain scarce, the talks signal a potential thaw and a renewed push for a diplomatic solution.

Israel’s leadership is said to be deeply frustrated by Trump’s rejection of the strike plan. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, facing pressure from his own coalition and a deteriorating security environment, has long insisted that Iran must be stopped by any means necessary. For Jerusalem, the prospect of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon represents an existential threat, and successive governments have maintained that military options must remain on the table.

The recent exchanges of strikes between Iran and Israel-most notably in April and October of last year-have already pushed the two regional foes to the brink. Though largely contained, these tit-for-tat attacks suggest that any full-scale conflict could spiral rapidly.

While Israel may still contemplate unilateral action, it now faces the prospect of going it alone, without the explicit backing or military support of its most powerful ally.

Trump’s pivot toward diplomacy with Iran also has a domestic dimension. As the 2024 presidential election approaches, the former president-turned-incumbent faces mounting pressure to avoid foreign entanglements. Voters, particularly in key swing states, remain wary of military interventions. Trump’s rejection of the Israeli strike plan allows him to portray himself as a dealmaker and peacemaker, potentially contrasting with the more interventionist reputation of past administrations.

It also distances his foreign policy from neoconservative influences-many of whom were prominent during his first term but have since been sidelined.

By rejecting Israel’s proposal for a preemptive strike against Iran, Trump has chosen a more cautious, strategic path, at least for now. His administration seems intent on exploring diplomatic solutions to the nuclear standoff, aware of the high costs and uncertain outcomes of military conflict.

The decision may not please hardliners in either Washington or Tel Aviv, but it reflects a growing recognition that regional stability cannot be secured through bombs alone. Whether the diplomatic overture bears fruit remains to be seen-but for now, war has been postponed.

In the Middle East, however, peace is always tentative. And the clock is still ticking.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel

The post Trump rejected Israeli plan to bomb Iran, opts for diplomatic track instead appeared first on BLiTZ.

[Read More]

—–
Source: Weekly Blitz :: Writings