Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Israel-Iran / The tense tussle over Trump’s Iran strategy
Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

June 12, 2025

The tense tussle over Trump’s Iran strategy

By Daniel DePetris

On May 25, President Donald Trump excitedly declared that a nuclear deal with Iran was just around the corner. Three weeks later, the president is noticeably more sanguine about reaching an agreement. “Iran is acting much differently in negotiations than it did just days ago,” Trump commented to Fox News this week. “Much more aggressive.”

The negative vibes extend to the Iranian side. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, still stung by his experience in 2018, when Trump pulled the United States out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, and re-imposed additional sanctions on Iran, is giving lectures that trusting the Americans is a fool’s errand.

All of this is occurring at a time when the Iran hawks in Washington are trying to pressure the White House to ditch the negotiations and throw their support behind Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bid to use military force to destroy Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Politico reported this week that conservative talk show host Mark Levin, whose feed on X is generally one long doom-scroll about Iran’s nuclear program, pushed Trump into approving a U.S. military operation against Iran during a private lunch at the White House. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson then pushed back against Levin in a long social media post.

These tensions reflect the fact that Trump is now waging two Iran-related battles simultaneously: one against Iran, and the other against competing camps of advisers. The second battle shouldn’t be cast away as the typical Washington-style palace intrigue, because depending on who wins Trump’s ear, the U.S. will either continue the diplomatic process or sacrifice diplomacy for a war that could very well get out of control.

Read at Washington Examiner

Author

Photo of Daniel DePetris

Daniel
DePetris

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

ExplainerMilitary analysis, Air power, Basing and force posture, Land power, Naval power

Aligning global military posture with U.S. interests

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Dan Caldwell

July 9, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East

Why the Israel-Iran ceasefire feels like a strategic failure

By Alexander Langlois

July 8, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Hamas, Israel, Israel‑Iran, Middle East

Don’t bet on a Gaza ceasefire

July 3, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East

What lessons are foreign leaders taking from Donald Trump’s Iran bombing?

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, China, Iran, North Korea, Russia

There is no ‘axis of autocracy’

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

In the mediaIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Nuclear weapons

What comes next in the Israeli-Iranian conflict?

Featuring Rosemary Kelanic and Jennifer Kavanagh

June 30, 2025

Events on Israel-Iran

See All Events
virtualMiddle East, Grand strategy, Israel‑Iran

Past Virtual Event: Does the Middle East still matter?

February 6, 2024
virtualMiddle East, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Israel‑Iran, Syria, Yemen

Past Virtual Event: Keeping the U.S. out of war in the Middle East

January 16, 2024
in-personMiddle East, Counterterrorism, Israel‑Iran

Past In-Person Event: Recalibrating Middle East policy

November 27, 2018

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved