Trump Sought Options for Attacking Iran to Stop Its Growing Nuclear Program

The president was dissuaded from moving ahead with a strike by advisers who warned that it could escalate into a broader conflict in his last weeks in office.

President Trump asked senior advisers in an Oval Office meeting on Thursday whether he had options to take action against Iran’s main nuclear site in the coming weeks. The meeting occurred a day after international inspectors reported a significant increase in the country’s stockpile of nuclear material, four current and former U.S. officials said on Monday.

A range of senior advisers dissuaded the president from moving ahead with a military strike. The advisers — including Vice President Mike Pence; Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Christopher C. Miller, the acting defense secretary; and Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — warned that a strike against Iran’s facilities could easily escalate into a broader conflict in the last weeks of Mr. Trump’s presidency.

Any strike — whether by missile or cyber — would almost certainly be focused on Natanz, where the International Atomic Energy Agency reported on Wednesday that Iran’s uranium stockpile was now 12 times larger than permitted under the nuclear accord that Mr. Trump abandoned in 2018. The agency also noted that Iran had not allowed it access to another suspected site where there was evidence of past nuclear activity.

Mr. Trump asked his top national security aides what options were available and how to respond, officials said.

After Mr. Pompeo and General Milley described the potential risks of military escalation, officials left the meeting believing a missile attack inside Iran was off the table, according to administration officials with knowledge of the meeting.

Mr. Trump might still be looking at ways to strike Iranian assets and allies, including militias in Iraq, officials said. A smaller group of national security aides had met late Wednesday to discuss Iran, the day before the meeting with the president.

White House officials did not respond to requests for comment.

The episode underscored how Mr. Trump still faces an array of global threats in his final weeks in office. A strike on Iran may not play well to his base, which is largely opposed to a deeper American conflict in the Middle East, but it could poison relations with Tehran so that it would be much harder for President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear accord, as he has promised to do.

Since Mr. Trump dismissed Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper and other top Pentagon aides last week, Defense Department and other national security officials have privately expressed worries that the president might initiate operations, whether overt or secret, against Iran or other adversaries at the end of his term.

The events of the past few days are not the first time that Iran policy has emerged in the final days of a departing administration. During the last days of the Bush administration in 2008, Israeli officials, concerned that the incoming Obama administration would seek to block it from striking Iran’s nuclear facilities, sought bunker-busting bombs, bombers and intelligence assistance from the United States for an Israeli-led strike.

Vice President Dick Cheney later wrote in his memoir that he supported the idea. President George W. Bush did not, but the result was a far closer collaboration with Israel on a cyberstrike against the Natanz facility, which took out about 1,000 of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges.

Ever since, the Pentagon has revised its strike plans multiple times. It now has traditional military as well as cyberoptions, and some that combine the two. Some involve direct action by Israel.
ImageA satellite image of the Natanz facility, where the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that Iran’s uranium stockpile was now 12 times larger than permitted under the nuclear accord that Mr. Trump abandoned in 2018.
Credit…Maxar Technologies/Reuters

The report from the International Atomic Energy Agency concluded that Iran now had a stockpile of more than 2,442 kilograms, or over 5,385 pounds, of low-enriched uranium. That is enough to produce about two nuclear weapons, according to an analysis of the report by the Institute for Science and International Security. But it would require several months of additional processing to enrich the uranium to bomb-grade material, meaning that Iran would not be close to a bomb until late spring at the earliest — well after Mr. Trump would have left office.

While the amount is concerning, it is far below the amount of fuel Iran possessed before President Barack Obama reached a nuclear accord with Tehran in July 2015. Late that year, under the terms of the accord, Iran shipped about 97 percent of its fuel stockpile to Russia — about 25,000 pounds — leaving it with less than it would need to build a single weapon.

The Iranians stuck to those limits even after Mr. Trump scrapped U.S. participation in the Iran accord in 2018 and reimposed sanctions. The Iranians began to slowly edge out of those limits last year, declaring that if Mr. Trump felt free to violate its terms, they would not continue to abide by them.

But the Iranians have hardly raced to produce new material: Their advances have been slow and steady, and they have denied seeking to build a weapon — though evidence stolen from the country several years ago by Israel made clear that was the plan before 2003.

Mr. Trump has argued since the 2016 campaign that Iran was hiding some of its actions and cheating on its commitments; the inspectors’ report last week gave him the first partial evidence to support that view. The report criticized Iran for not answering a series of questions about a warehouse in Tehran where inspectors found uranium particles, leading to suspicion that it had once been some kind of nuclear-processing facility. The report said Iran’s answers were “not technically credible.”

The International Atomic Energy Agency has previously complained that inspectors have been barred from fully reviewing some suspected sites.

It is not just the U.S. military that is looking at options. Mr. Pompeo, officials said, is closely watching events unfolding on the ground in Iraq for any hint of aggression from Iran or its proxy militias against American diplomats or troops stationed there.

Mr. Pompeo already drew up plans to close the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad over concerns of potential threats, although in recent days he appeared willing to leave that decision to the next administration. Mortar and rocket attacks against the embassy have waned over the past several weeks, and the task to shutter the largest American diplomatic mission in the world could take months to complete.

But officials said that could change if any Americans are killed before Inauguration Day.

Officials are especially nervous about the Jan. 3 anniversary of the U.S. strike that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, the commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, and the Iraqi leader of an Iranian-backed militia — deaths that Iranian leaders regularly insist they have not yet avenged.

Mr. Pompeo, who has been the most strident proponent among Mr. Trump’s advisers of hobbling Iran while the administration still can, has more recently made clear that the death of an American was a red line that could provoke a military response.

That would also increase tensions between Washington and Baghdad. Diplomats said Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi of Iraq would almost certainly object to the killing of Iraqis — even Iranian-backed militiamen — on Iraqi soil by U.S. forces who already face demands to leave.

Eric Schmitt is a senior writer who has traveled the world covering terrorism and national security. He was also the Pentagon correspondent. A member of the Times staff since 1983, he has shared three Pulitzer Prizes. @EricSchmittNYT

Maggie Haberman is a White House correspondent. She joined The Times in 2015 as a campaign correspondent and was part of a team that won a Pulitzer Prize in 2018 for reporting on President Trump’s advisers and their connections to Russia. @maggieNYT

David E. Sanger is a national security correspondent. In a 36-year reporting career for The Times, he has been on three teams that have won Pulitzer Prizes, most recently in 2017 for international reporting. His newest book is “The Perfect Weapon: War, Sabotage and Fear in the Cyber Age.” @SangerNYT  Facebook

Helene Cooper is a Pentagon correspondent. She was previously an editor, diplomatic correspondent and White House correspondent, and was part of the team awarded the 2015 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting, for its coverage of the Ebola epidemic. @helenecooper

Lara Jakes is a diplomatic correspondent based in the Washington bureau of The New York Times. Over the past two decades, Ms. Jakes has reported and edited from more than 40 countries and covered war and sectarian fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, the West Bank and Northern Ireland. @jakesNYT

8 thoughts on “Trump Sought Options for Attacking Iran to Stop Its Growing Nuclear Program

  1. Keith November 17, 2020 / 12:14

    Scottie, this is the kind of stuff that should scare us all. There was a British show on two years ago about the future following a rise of an authoritarian PM. The context for the show was Trump won a second term then right before President Pence took the reins, Trump nuked a Chinese built island. The world boycotted America and the UK suffered as a result. Trump is acting like a “monkey with a hand grenade.” Keith

    Liked by 2 people

    • Scottie November 17, 2020 / 19:08

      Hello Keith. I never seen the show but I wished I had. The article had mentioned that this could be a ploy to hobble any attempt at reconciliation with Iran by the Biden team. It also could be tRump’s last chance to show he was correct and that Iran would crumble if he left the deal. Iran has withstood everything tRump threw at them. They have basically bested tRump by surviving. I just seen that tRump lost his latest case in front of the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court. Also tRump has cancelled his Thanksgiving trip to his winter white house. What do you think this means? Hugs

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Nan November 17, 2020 / 12:22

    Unfortunately, these are the type of issues that many Trump-pets either don’t consider or gloss over because it’s above their intelligence level. Yes, there are war-mongers in the crowd that would support whatever Trump decides to do … but anyone with half a brain knows this is an issue that must be handled with care. Unfortunately, revenge is sweeter than safety to Dear Leader so we must simply hold our breaths and hope for the best.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Scottie November 17, 2020 / 19:14

      Hello Nan. I just said about the same thing to Keith. This is tRump’s last chance to prove he was right, to show his superiority to Obama, to make the deal that he claimed only he could make, to force Iran to crumble. But also this is Israel’s last chance to really hurt Iran with out consequence as Biden simply wont agree to an all out attack on Iran, not from the US nor from Israel. So I am sure there is a lot of pressure from a lot of different groups. Hugs

      Liked by 2 people

    • Scottie November 18, 2020 / 04:52

      Hello Randy. How is the busy boy doing? I am feeling better. Go tomorrow to see the result of the scan.

      The joke about tRump is there is a tweet saying that Obama or others are doing what he is doing. He is all about projection. He knows he would do the crooked illegal thing so he expects others to do so. Hugs

      Like

  3. randy November 17, 2020 / 18:47

    Scottie;
    I put a comment in. There is a link in the comment, and that sometimes makes it go to your spam. Leave, remove, whatever. Just wanted you to recall the point.

    Miss you my brother. Life way too dang busy. Bad day today… will have to tell you about it next time we talk.
    Hugs.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Scottie November 18, 2020 / 05:00

      Hello Brother. It came through OK and I answered it. I have just been days behind in comments because of how fatigued I was getting. We think we found a way around the bloating and pain in the abdomen. It should save us money also. I switched from my favorite carbonated beverage to different Crystal Light drinks. I like it but have to be careful to check which ones are non caffeinated. I am not use to that and yesterday the one I was drinking had caffeine, and I was up late and struggled to sleep. But even so I feel better today. Ron still thinks I have an ulcer or a hernia. I will find out tomorrow. Hugs

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.