Before attacking Iran, US President Donald Trump was warned by US intelligence that killing Iran’s former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, could result in him being replaced by a more radical regime with greater interest in acquiring nuclear weapons, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday.
In the lead-up to the February attack that started the US-Israel war with Iran, Trump reportedly called his intelligence chief at that time, Tulsi Gabbard, to the Oval Office to discuss the advisability of a full-scale military assault.
According to sources familiar with the meeting who spoke to WSJ, Gabbard cautioned Trump that killing Iran’s supreme leader could bring about a hard-line government that would be more inclined to pursue nuclear arms.
She also warned that Iran might swiftly close the Strait of Hormuz, jeopardizing the global energy market. Additionally, she argued that targeting Iran could lead to attacks on US forces and allies in the Middle East, which would raise questions about American reliability and resolve among its partners.
Security officials advise against launching an attack
Several of Trump’s senior national security officials similarly advised against launching an attack, expressing concerns about potential mass casualties, a limited weapons stockpile, and readiness issues for an overstretched military.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, and Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of US Central Command, reportedly briefed Trump several times on plans to strike Iranian targets with the expressed goal of ultimately weakening the Islamic Republic and incapacitating its military forces while allowing Israel to focus on targeting Iran’s top leadership.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also reportedly informed Trump that the potential attack would provide him with a rare opportunity to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program and enhance his legacy as a peacemaker, WSJ noted.
Hegseth and Caine allegedly repeatedly claimed that they could manage any complications that might arise during the operation, according to officials who attended the meetings.
Despite receiving warnings from Gabbard and other senior national security officials during this timeframe, Trump ultimately dismissed their concerns. Instead, he echoed Hegseth and Caine’s confidence, suggesting the military could address any issues as they arose.
Vance pushed for negotiations with Iran before Op. Epic Fury
Another voice of caution came from Vice President JD Vance.
US officials told WSJ that Vance advocated for a more cautious approach during meetings leading up to Operation Epic Fury.
He reportedly suggested that Iran might be swayed to dismantle its nuclear program through negotiations. Vance pointed out that while pursuing a deal carried some risk, it would be less costly than the potential consequences of war.
He emphasized that Iran’s economy was already suffering due to heavy US sanctions. If negotiations failed, he argued, Trump would then have greater legitimacy to execute a swift and overwhelming military operation against Iran.
Although Trump reportedly considered Vance’s perspective, US officials told WSJ that he was ultimately persuaded by Pentagon presentations outlining more “decisive” options.
Tensions with Iran unresolved after six months of war
Six months after the attack that kicked off the war, military clashes between Iran and the US have paused, but disagreements over the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s nuclear assets, and US sanctions have persisted.
Trump’s latest statement regarding the war came on Tuesday as he claimed that the US is closely watching the strait and nuclear sites from space.
In a post on Truth Social, he also asserted that all mines placed by Iran have been removed from Hormuz and that any attempt by Tehran to place new ones would be stopped.
Meanwhile, Iran has made its own demands regarding the state clear by sending messages to Washington through Pakistani mediators as recently as Tuesday.
