For a tense stretch of days, Washington and Tehran appeared to be inching toward a dangerous showdown.
Fighter jets were repositioned, Iranian airspace briefly shut down, and the White House spoke in the kind of language that usually precedes military action.
Yet behind closed doors, a very different conversation was unfolding—one that ultimately pulled Donald Trump back from ordering strikes on Iran.
Bluster in Public, Doubt in Private
Publicly, Trump sounded ready for confrontation.
He warned that the United States was “locked and loaded,” hinted that military action could come at any moment, and even encouraged Iranian protesters to keep demonstrating, promising that “help is on the way.”
Those comments fueled speculation that US bombs could soon fall on Iranian targets.
Privately, however, advisers were urging caution.
According to insiders, Trump was being warned that even limited strikes could spiral into another long, grinding conflict in the Middle East—exactly the kind of war he had repeatedly vowed to avoid.
Why the Military Option Lost Momentum
As Trump leaned toward action early in the week, officials raised serious doubts.
Some told him they weren’t confident airstrikes alone could weaken or topple Iran’s leadership.
Others questioned whether the US had enough regional firepower to sustain an extended campaign if Iran retaliated.
By Tuesday night, some military officials reportedly went to sleep expecting an attack the next day.
Instead, Trump began pulling back, seeking out a broader range of opinions and reconsidering the potential fallout.
Executions Become a Turning Point
Trump later said what changed his mind was Iran’s apparent pause in mass executions.
He claimed that hundreds of hangings had been scheduled but were suddenly called off, which he said made a “big impact” on his thinking.
“I convinced myself,” Trump told reporters, insisting no one pressured him into the decision.
Still, reporting suggested the choice came after intense internal debate and warnings that US credibility—and regional stability—were on the line.
Protesters Left Hanging Without Backup
The sudden shift left many Iranian protesters exposed.
After Trump’s vocal encouragement, the absence of US action felt like a broken promise to some observers.
Suzanne Maloney, an Iran expert at the Brookings Institution, warned that the reversal could haunt Washington for years.
She said Trump had “put American credibility on the line,” predicting a deep sense of betrayal among Iranians that would outlast his presidency.
Allies Sound the Alarm From All Sides
As tensions rose, the White House wasn’t just listening to its own advisers.
Officials from Israel and several Arab countries were also weighing in.
They warned that Iran’s situation was too volatile to predict and that protests appeared to have already been largely crushed.
There were also fears about what would come next if Iran’s leadership fell.
No clear successor government existed, despite claims from exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi that he could step in.
Regional Blowback Looms Large
Another major concern centered on US allies in the region.
Presentations to Trump reportedly included scenarios where Iran retaliated against American bases in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, or Saudi Arabia, dragging those countries into the conflict.
At the same time, Iranian officials—including national security adviser Ali Larijani—were said to be quietly pushing intermediaries in Iraq and Turkey to help talk Trump out of military action.
Netanyahu’s Quiet Warning
Even Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly advised restraint.
According to accounts, he told Trump it might already be too late for outside intervention to meaningfully help the uprising in Tehran—a rare note of caution from a leader often seen as hawkish on Iran.
Mixed Signals From the White House
Despite backing away from strikes, the administration kept its options open.
Military assets were moved toward Iran, preserving the ability to act quickly if Trump changed his mind.
At the same time, Trump struck a softer tone, publicly thanking Iran’s leaders for halting executions.
He did not explain how he verified that decision or who he spoke with inside Iran, adding to the ambiguity surrounding US intentions.
Rage Still Boiling Inside Iran
While streets in Tehran returned to an uneasy calm, signs of fury remained.
A hard-line cleric openly called for the execution of detained protesters and issued direct threats toward Trump, underscoring how tense the situation remains.
Executions and the killing of peaceful demonstrators remain Trump’s stated red lines for intervention, even as the Iranian government tightens its grip.
A Protest Movement Crushed—For Now
The protests, sparked by economic hardship and evolving into a broader challenge to Iran’s theocratic rule, appear to have been smothered by force.
Thousands have reportedly been killed, and internet blackouts have persisted even as daily life resumes on the surface.
Human Rights Activists say more than 3,000 people have died, making this the deadliest unrest Iran has seen in decades—numbers that echo the turmoil of the 1979 revolution.
Pahlavi Pushes for Action From Exile
From abroad, Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi continues to urge international support.
He insists he still believes Trump will honor his promises and has called on Iranians to keep resisting, even urging renewed street protests.
Despite vocal backing from monarchists outside Iran, Pahlavi has struggled to gain broad support inside the country.
Even Trump has publicly questioned whether he could rally enough domestic backing to lead a transition.
Europe Raises Its Voice
As the crackdown intensified, European governments responded diplomatically.
Britain, France, Germany, and Italy all summoned Iranian ambassadors, protesting the violent repression and adding to the growing international pressure on Tehran.
So, What Comes Next?
For now, the crisis sits in an uneasy pause.
Trump has stepped back from immediate military action but left the door open.
Iran’s leadership appears to have crushed dissent—for the moment—while resentment simmers beneath the surface.
The big question remains whether this standoff fades quietly or erupts again, driven by unfinished protests, hard-line threats, or a sudden shift in Washington’s calculations.
Share on Facebook «||» Share on Twitter «||» Share on Reddit «||» Share on LinkedIn