Trump’s Emergency White House Meeting and Divided Opinions on Strikes Against Iran’s Nuclear Sites

On June 18, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump convened an emergency meeting in the White House Situation Room with his national security advisors to discuss potential U.S. military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, particularly the Fordo enrichment site. The meeting followed Israel’s recent airstrikes on a centrifuge production facility and weapons manufacturing sites near Tehran, launched as part of “Operation Rising Lion” starting June 13, 2025. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) claimed these strikes aimed to disrupt Iran’s nuclear weapons program, though Iran has not officially acknowledged the attacks.

Trump’s Stance and the White House Meeting

According to CBS News, Trump considered military action to fully dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, with the deeply fortified Fordo facility as a potential target. However, his advisors were divided. Some, like National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, expressed skepticism about military action, noting the difficulty of success without U.S. military support. Meanwhile, Trump publicly demanded Iran’s “unconditional surrender” and warned that U.S. patience was running out. In a Truth Social post, he stated that Iran would not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons and urged Tehran residents to evacuate immediately.

Divided Opinions and U.S. Policy

A clear divide exists within the Trump administration. Some officials, such as Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, warned that an attack on Iran could spark a broader regional conflict, which the U.S. should avoid. They advocate for diplomatic solutions, such as talks scheduled in Oman on June 22, 2025, though their feasibility is uncertain following Israel’s strikes.

In Congress, opinions are also split. Some members, like Senator John Fetterman, support military strikes to eliminate Iran’s nuclear program, while Senator Tim Kaine introduced a resolution urging restraint and requiring congressional approval for any unilateral action against Iran.

Israel and Iran’s Perspectives

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the strikes on nuclear facilities as essential to neutralizing Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic missile threat, and terrorism network. He suggested that targeting Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei could end the conflict. In response, Iran threatened retaliatory strikes on Israel’s nuclear sites and maintained that its nuclear program is solely for civilian purposes. Iranian officials labeled U.S. threats as “open hostility against national interests.”

International Response and Consequences

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported damage to the Natanz facility but noted that Fordo’s deep underground installations remain secure. No increase in radiation levels was detected in the area. Russia attempted mediation between Israel and Iran, while the UN Secretary-General condemned military escalation in the Middle East. Global oil markets faced heightened volatility, as the strikes impacted the South Pars gas field shared by Iran and Qatar.