White House seeks Iran strike options before US midterms

The White House asked the Pentagon to prepare options for possible strikes on Iran before the November 3 US midterm elections, according to a report by The Jerusalem Post. US Central Command was developing the proposals, while potential targets, the scale of any operation and whether President Donald Trump would approve military action remained undecided, the report said.¹

Military options

The reported request did not amount to a decision to use force. A White House official said the president “has all options available at any time”, while the report said discussions were continuing over the nature of possible action. The Pentagon was also weighing post-election military plans, including anything from narrowly focused strikes to a more extensive campaign that might involve additional attacks on Iran’s energy sector.¹

Officials cited in the report linked the planning to Trump’s wish to demonstrate progress in the conflict and respond to high gasoline prices before the election. Backers of a limited operation believed it could allow Trump to claim a military achievement ahead of the vote, according to the report. However, they also accepted that strikes by themselves would not deliver an agreement with Tehran, ensure navigation through the Strait of Hormuz or lower gasoline prices by election day.¹

According to the report, other advisers to the president favored delaying any action until the election had passed. Their concern was that renewed combat, especially if US troops were killed, could damage Republican candidates in the midterm elections.¹

Conflicting public signals

Trump gave differing public signals about the prospect of action before the vote. He said the United States “will not be attacking Iran at any time prior to the Midterm Elections.” But, when asked separately about possible renewed action, he said: “We may. I mean, we'll see.”¹²

Trump also described Iran as being in serious difficulty after the conflict, saying its military had been defeated and that it had no navy or air force. Those were Trump’s characterisations, rather than independently established assessments in the available reporting.¹

On October 2, The Jerusalem Post said preparations were under way for a potential larger US naval deployment in the region while Trump weighed resuming attacks after the election. The report also said that naval deployment questions remained under consideration while the administration weighed its next steps.¹

Talks and maritime pressure

The report said the United States and Iran remain in indirect contact, although they still disagree on ending hostilities, the American blockade and restoring access through the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian attacks on shipping earlier in the week led some shipowners to reconsider travelling through the waterway, the report said.¹

Nuclear issues remain among the obstacles to an agreement. Vice-President JD Vance said an accord would require “concrete reductions in Iran’s enrichment capacity”. According to the report, a senior Iranian official said Tehran regarded acknowledgment of its entitlement to enrich uranium as non-negotiable.¹

The report said Washington was uncertain about how decisions were being taken within Iran’s leadership and about the authority held by Iranian negotiating counterparts. That uncertainty, together with disagreement over enrichment, left the prospects for an agreement unresolved.¹