Trump Started War Against Iran. He's Still Figuring Out How It Ends
The US-Israel campaign began with coordinated strikes in Tehran and the killing of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the first day.
When the United States and Israel launched strikes against Iran a week ago, Donald Trump said the goal was to let the Iranian people rise and reclaim their country. Then it was a way to destroy the "imminent Iranian threat". Then regime change. Then he wanted to personally pick Iran's next leader. By Friday, he was demanding unconditional surrender. His senior officials, meanwhile, offered their own explanations that frequently contradicted his.
The US-Israel campaign, dubbed Operation Epic Fury by the Pentagon, began with coordinated American and Israeli strikes and the killing of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the first day. Tehran retaliated with strikes of its own against Israel and Middle East countries hosting US bases.
A week into the war, what Trump actually wants remains, at best, unclear, and his own statements suggest even he may not know.
Day One: A Fight Against Iran's Threat
Trump first announced the campaign on 28 February in an eight-minute video posted on Truth Social. He framed the attack as a response to what he described as decades of Iranian aggression against the United States. He accused Tehran of refusing to abandon its nuclear ambitions while developing missiles capable of threatening American forces and allies.
The United States, he said, would "raze Iran's missile industry to the ground" and "annihilate" the country's navy. He also appealed directly to Iranian citizens. "The hour of your freedom is at hand," Trump said, urging them to "take over your government."
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 28, 2026
Even before the first day was out, Trump was switching things. Speaking to Axios on 28 February, just hours after the strikes began, the US president said he has multiple options. "I can go long and take over the whole thing, or end it in two or three days and tell the Iranians: 'See you again in a few years if you start rebuilding [your nuclear and missile programs],'" he said.
That same day, the US mission to the United Nations moved to build a legal case, invoking Article 51 of the UN Charter - the self-defence provision. US Ambassador Mike Waltz said Washington had made every effort to resolve matters peacefully, but Iran had refused.
Day Two: Pentagon Undercut The 'Imminent Threat' Claim
Trump administration officials, speaking in closed-door briefings with congressional staff, acknowledged there was no intelligence indicating Iran was planning to strike American forces first. That admission directly contradicted the White House's public justification of an imminent threat.
Day Three: Regime Change Or Not?
On March 2, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth attempted to present the war as a focused military campaign. "The mission of Operation Epic Fury is laser-focused. Destroy Iranian offensive missiles, destroy Iranian missile production, destroy their navy and other security infrastructure, and they will never have nuclear weapons," he said.
Hegseth also rejected suggestions that Washington was seeking to overthrow Iran's government, saying, "This is not a so-called regime-change war, but the regime sure did change, and the world is better off for it."
"This is not Iraq. This is not endless ... This is the opposite ... This operation has a clear, devastating, decisive mission," he added.
Within hours, Secretary of State Marco Rubio offered another explanation for the war's timing. Rubio said Washington knew Israel was planning a strike and believed Iran would retaliate against American forces.
"We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties," he said.
"There absolutely was an imminent threat, and the imminent threat was that we knew that if Iran was attacked, and we believed they would be attacked, that they would immediately come after us."
Day Four: Trump Overrules His Own Secretary of State
On 3 March, Trump dismissed Rubio's explanation entirely. The decision, he said, was his alone, driven by Iranian intentions rather than Israeli ones. "Based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they were going to attack first, and I didn't want that to happen," he said while speaking to reporters. Rubio subsequently walked his comments back, saying they had been taken out of context.
Day Five: 'We Have Only Just Begun'
At the second Pentagon briefing on 4 March, Hegseth announced that American and Israeli air power would soon have complete, uncontested control of Iranian skies, says US will be "flying over Iran, flying over their capital... Iranian leaders looking up and seeing only US and Israeli air power every minute of every day until we decide it's over."
"[The Iranian regime] is toast, and they know it, or at least soon enough, they will know it. And we have only just begun to hunt, dismantle, demoralise, destroy and defeat their capabilities just four days in."
Day Six: Trump Wants To Pick Iran's Next Leader
On 5 March, Trump told Axios he expected to be personally involved in selecting Iran's new leader, comparing the situation directly to his involvement in Venezuela. US preisdent said he found the most likely successor, Mojtaba Khamenei, son of the assassinated Supreme Leader, entirely unacceptable.
"They are wasting their time. Khamenei's son is a lightweight. I have to be involved in the appointment, like with Delcy [Delcy Rodriguez, who replaced Maduro] in Venezuela," Trump said. "We want someone who will bring harmony and peace to Iran."
Day Seven: Unconditional Surrender And 'Make Iran Great Again'
On the morning of 6 March, Trump demanded "unconditional surrender" from Iran on Truth Social.
"There will be no deal with Iran except unconditional surrender! After that, and the selection of a great & acceptable leader(s)," Trump wrote. He added that after such a surrender, the United States and its allies would help rebuild the country.
"Iran will have a great future. Make Iran Great Again (MIGA!)"
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt tried to downplay the statement, saying that nothing had shifted, adding that unconditional surrender simply meant the point at which Trump determines Iran is no longer a threat.
Iran Shows No Sign Of Surrender
Despite Trump's demands, Iran has not indicated any intention of surrendering. Instead, Tehran has expanded the conflict, launching missiles and drones toward countries hosting American bases across the Middle East.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian apologised to neighbouring states for the attacks but insisted Iran would defend itself. "I must apologise on my own behalf and on behalf of Iran to the neighbouring countries that were attacked by Iran... no missiles will be fired unless an attack on Iran originates from those countries," he said.
Apparently commenting on the apology, Trump said, "Iran, which is being beaten to HELL, has apologised and surrendered to its Middle East neighbours, and promised that it will not shoot at them anymore." He declared Iran was no longer "the Bully of the Middle East" but "THE LOSER OF THE MIDDLE EAST."
To recap, here are the explanations that have been offered so far: Iran posed an imminent nuclear threat, Iran would have retaliated against an Israeli strike anyway, the goal was regime change, Iran itself was about to attack first, and now, unconditional surrender.
-
Analysis | Can Donald Trump Face An 'Arrest Warrant' - Like Netanyahu And Putin?
No one in living memory imagined a moment when the world would seriously debate the possibility of an American president being dragged before a court. Has it come now?
-
US' $240 Million Drone Over Cuba That's Strangling China's Oil Supply
From Venezuela to Hormuz to Malacca, the US has made three moves to strangle China's oil. Now a $240M drone over Cuba signals move four — and Trump wants the island. The chessboard is almost complete.
-
Opinion | Amir Hamza Attack Was A Symptom. A Deadlier Storm Is Brewing Within Lashkar
There is an ongoing power struggle within Lashkar for the top spot, which may lead to new terrorists wanting to 'prove' themselves. The obvious means? India.
-
Noida Turns 50: How The Planned City Outgrew Its Initial Brief
Noida's growth has been steady. This created trust. And trust attracted capital. Today, Noida is no longer just a supporting player in the NCR story.
-
Opinion | Trump's Favourite Field Marshal: How Munir Became The President's Best Man
Pakistan and the United States are not obvious analogues. And yet, their respective leaders have made a comparison inevitable today.
-
A Missile On One Soldier's Shoulder Could Ground The US Air War In Iran
Iran shot down US jets while China denied arming Tehran. But reports of a Chinese spy satellite being used by Iran, the viral F-35 tutorial from a Chinese engineer, and now 1,000+ MANPADs reportedly on their way to the war suggests otherwise.
-
Opinion | Amid Trump's War On The World, How Effective Really Is India's Strategic Autonomy?
India cannot mechanistically base its positions on preferred international norms, unmindful of its own direct interests.
-
Opinion | In Stalin's Tamil Nadu vs Delhi Pitch, Flashbacks From A 2014 Jayalalithaa Episode
In 2014, Jayalalithaa had posed the question to the Tamil Nadu electorate,"Gujarat Modiyaa Tamil Nadu odu intha ladyaa"(Gujarat's Modi or this lady of Tamil Nadu), and tasted electoral success, winning 37 of the 39 seats in the state.
-
'Help', Said Trump In Iran. Why US' European Allies Hesitated, Walked Away
47 days into the war, Europe has rejected Trump's attacks on Iran on the back of $25B Hormuz blockade shock that spiked inflation to 2.5% and prompted 59% of EU voters to call the strikes illegal (71% Spain), while Trump's Pope spat draws ire from Italy.
-
Assassination That Took 20 Years: Spies, Missed Chances, Then A Final Moment
Before Osama bin Laden became the global face of transnational terrorism, there was another figure-more elusive, less theatrical, but arguably more influential in the evolution of modern guerrilla warfare. He was Imad Mughniyeh.