President Trump was meeting on Friday with top advisers and senior members of his cabinet to decide whether to intensify the military assault against Iran, according to four people briefed on the planned discussion.
The meeting comes as Mr. Trump faces a potential inflection point in his approach to Iran, after the collapse of a fragile cease-fire and a memorandum of understanding that was intended to bring the United States and Iran back to the negotiating table for a longer-term denuclearization deal.
Mr. Trump previewed some of his discussions in an interview with Axios on Thursday, saying: “I am considering a massive attack. Bigger than ever before. I am close to making a decision. We are all set for it.”
He also indicated that the Israelis most likely would not be part of a new escalation, saying there could be “consequences” for them, apparently meaning from Iran. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel is coming to the United States on Monday and plans to meet with Mr. Trump, Mr. Netanyahu’s office announced.
Mr. Trump has insisted the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran would be a relatively short “excursion,” although it has now lasted nearly five months, with no end in sight.
The cease-fire collapsed after Iran hit a cargo ship traversing the Strait of Hormuz with a drone strike late last month, which was followed by additional strikes on ships soon after. The United States resumed strikes against Iran as well as its military blockade of the Strait.
In the last two weeks, Iranian strikes against U.S. interests in the Middle East, including a military base in Jordan, have killed four service members.
So far, threats of increased bombings by Mr. Trump have not worked as a deterrent against new attacks from Iran. Some of the Iran’s current leaders appear to be more hard line than those who were killed by joint U.S. and Israeli operations earlier in the year. And the fight is asymmetrical in a very specific way: While Iran is struggling economically and has seen some erosion of its own military, its theocratic leadership is far more willing to absorb conflict with the United States regardless of the broader costs to its own country than any American president is.
