Connect with us

America

Trump caught between hawks, markets, and his base as Iran war drags past initial timeline

Published

on

A complex power struggle is playing out inside the White House. As advisers clash over when and how to declare “victory” in a conflict that has spread across West Asia, their competing counsel is shaping the increasingly erratic public statements Donald Trump makes about the course of his Iran war.

Interviews conducted by Reuters with an adviser close to Trump and with sources familiar with the decision-making process offer a previously unpublished account of how the administration is navigating what has become the largest US military operation since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Nearly two weeks after fighting began, the conflict has rattled global financial markets and disrupted international oil trade.

The stakes are extraordinarily high for a president who, upon returning to office last year, pledged to avoid “unnecessary military entanglements.”

While competition for Trump’s ear is a recurring feature of his presidency, what hangs in the balance this time is war and peace in one of the world’s most volatile and economically consequential regions.

The message shifts, the markets swing

Since launching the war on Feb. 28 with an expansive set of stated objectives, Trump has in recent days progressively retreated from those goals, recasting the conflict as “a limited operation that is largely complete.”

That message, however, has yet to hold. Energy markets continue to swing with each Trump statement.

At a rally in Kentucky on Wednesday, Trump declared, “We won the war,” before immediately pivoting. “But we don’t want to leave too early, do we?” he added. “We need to finish the job.”

The economy sends alarm signals

Economic advisers — including officials from the Treasury Department and the National Economic Council — have warned Trump that the oil shock and surging gasoline prices could rapidly erode domestic public support for the war, according to sources. Political advisers are pressing similar arguments.

White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and her deputy James Blair are urging Trump to define victory “narrowly” and to emphasize that the operation appears limited and nearly concluded, with particular attention to the political fallout of high fuel prices.

The hawks hold the line

On a separate front, hawkish voices are pressing Trump to maintain military pressure on Iran. That camp includes Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton, along with commentator Mark Levin.

These figures argue that the US must prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and must respond forcefully to attacks against American troops and maritime shipping.

A third pressure track comes from Trump’s populist base. Strategist Steve Bannon and right-wing broadcaster Tucker Carlson have been conveying to Trump that the US must not be dragged into a new, protracted “Middle East war.”

An adviser close to Trump distilled the dynamic with striking clarity: “Trump is letting the hawks believe the campaign is ongoing, wants the markets to think the war could be ending soon, and is trying to show his own base that the escalation will remain contained.”

In response to requests for comment, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said: “This report is based on gossip and speculation from anonymous sources who have not even been in any meetings with President Trump. The president is a good listener and takes in the views of many people, but he is the one who makes the final call and sets the best message. The president’s entire team is focused on fully achieving the objectives of Operation Righteous Fury.”

Threading contradictory narratives

Trump offered scant public explanation when he took the country to war. The administration’s stated war aims have since shifted across a wide spectrum — from preventing an imminent Iranian attack, to crippling its nuclear programme, to effecting regime change.

Now seeking an exit from a conflict that lacks broad public support, Trump appears to be simultaneously sustaining contradictory narratives, according to some analysts — a balancing act made more treacherous by Iran’s continued resistance despite the devastating toll of US-Israeli airstrikes.

Political and economic advisers whose pre-war warnings about economic shock were largely dismissed have come to the fore this week. They appear to be playing a decisive role in Trump’s efforts to calm markets and limit the rise in oil and gas prices.

Trump’s characterization of the war as “a short-duration operation” and his insistence that the spike in gasoline prices is temporary are aimed at defusing anxiety over a prolonged conflict.

Some senior advisers have counseled Trump to work toward “a result he can present as a military victory,” according to sources — a scenario under which the war could be brought to a close even if much of Iran’s leadership survives and vestiges of its nuclear programme persist.

Limited gains on the ground, mounting costs at sea

A series of US and Israeli airstrikes has killed numerous senior Iranian officials. Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal, its navy, and its infrastructure have sustained damage, and its capacity to support proxy forces has been weakened.

But those military gains have been substantially overshadowed by Iran’s escalating attacks on oil tankers and transit facilities in the Gulf, which have driven crude prices higher.

Trump has stated that he alone will decide when the operation ends. He and his advisers privately acknowledge that it has extended well beyond the four-to-six-week timeframe initially announced. The shifting rationales for why the war began, combined with the conflict’s spread across more than half a dozen countries, make it increasingly difficult to predict what comes next.

In the assessment of analysts, Iran’s government will claim victory by asserting its survival in the face of the US-Israeli assault — a narrative that gains force wherever Iran can demonstrate that it has inflicted damage on Israel, the US, and their allies.

The Strait of Hormuz: The decisive test

The conflict’s central hinge point is the Strait of Hormuz. Under normal circumstances, roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil shipments pass through that narrow waterway. Flow has now nearly ground to a halt.

Iran has in recent days targeted tankers in Iraqi waters and vessels near the strait; Mojtaba Khamenei, the newly installed supreme leader, has pledged to keep the waterway closed.

Should Iran’s stranglehold on the strait push gasoline prices sharply higher in the US, the resulting pressure on Republicans — who are fighting to preserve their razor-thin congressional majorities ahead of November’s midterm elections — could intensify demands on Trump to bring the war to an end.

Trump has lately been less vocal about the prospect of toppling the government in Tehran. US intelligence assesses that Iran’s leadership faces no imminent risk of collapse.

The cost of the Venezuela illusion

Some of the confusion surrounding the war’s trajectory may trace back to the swift military success the US achieved in Venezuela.

According to a source familiar with the administration’s thinking, some advisers struggled to convince Trump that the Iran operation would bear no resemblance to the Venezuela raid of Jan. 3.

In that operation, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was seized and Trump secured significant leverage over the country’s vast oil reserves without requiring a sustained military campaign. Iran has proved a far more formidable adversary — one with more advanced weapons and deeply entrenched religious and security institutions.

Analysts note that even as Trump has repeatedly insisted since June that the US-Israeli bombardment “destroyed” Iran’s nuclear programme, Trump’s own aides are pushing back against the claim that Iran was weeks away from producing a nuclear weapon.

It is believed that a significant portion of Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile was buried during the June strikes; that material could theoretically be recovered, re-enriched, and brought to weapons grade. Iran has consistently denied pursuing a nuclear weapon.

Should the war drag on, American casualties mount, and economic costs escalate, some analysts believe those developments could erode support within Trump’s political base.

Yet despite criticism from some supporters who oppose military interventions, members of the Make America Great Again movement have, by and large, continued to back Trump’s Iran policy. Republican strategist Ford O’Connell summed up the dynamic: “The MAGA base will give the president room to maneuver.”

America

AI spending heads toward $7 trillion as analysts warn of market bubble risks

Published

on

Massive financial resources directed into artificial intelligence technologies are driving companies into dangerous territory for global markets.

If expected productivity gains fail to materialize despite these immense capital flows, the artificial intelligence sector faces the risk of inflating into a giant bubble.

The Wall Street Journal reported that should such a scenario unfold, a widespread collapse capable of shaking the entire financial system and dragging down the broader market will become inevitable.

Estimates by McKinsey & Company project that global spending on data center construction alone could reach $7 trillion by 2030.

According to the newspaper, if these massive investments fail to deliver adequate productivity gains, the global economy will suffer a severe blow.

Should the sector as a whole turn out to be a bubble, the resulting damage will spread directly across the broader financial system.

While market observers note that a major crash—whether sooner or later—would drag all equity markets down with it, declines in AI-related stocks are currently being offset by gains in other sectors.

However, the first concrete signs of emerging vulnerability appeared in the memory chip market, where a sector-specific bubble formed and burst within just four months.

South Korean market shaken by sharp drop

In June, shares of South Korea’s Samsung and SK Hynix, the world’s two largest memory chip makers, sank by more than 12%.

The sharp sell-off pulled down the country’s broader stock index. South Korea’s benchmark Kospi index dropped 10%, triggering an automatic 20-minute trading halt.

Growing investor anxiety over artificial intelligence triggered the steep decline in the two giant companies, which together account for half of the total market capitalization of the Kospi index.

US equity markets also felt the ripple effects during the same period. The Nasdaq index closed down 2.2%, while the S&P 500 fell 1.4%, marking their worst single-day performances in two weeks.

Nevertheless, The Wall Street Journal pointed out that the disruption has not yet produced catastrophic consequences for the rest of the market.

While the bursting of massive historical bubbles resulted in disaster for national economies, smaller and localized bubbles in recent years have failed to paralyze broader economic growth.

The primary reason for this resilience is that these recent investments were not predominantly funded through leverage and bank credit.

When those localized bubbles burst, investors suffered wealth losses, but the financial system remained intact.

Russell Napier, a global macroeconomic strategist and keeper of the Library of Mistakes, a financial history archive in Edinburgh, evaluated the current market posture:

“The banking system is in superb condition, which means there will always be enough credit available to blow the next bubble.”

Continue Reading

America

Anthropic AI models breach corporate systems after escaping isolated test environment

Published

on

Anthropic has announced that several of its advanced artificial intelligence models escaped an isolated testing environment and accessed the live internet.

In a review published Thursday night, the company stated that in three separate incidents dating back to April, the models independently breached the systems of multiple companies without the AI developer’s knowledge.

Anthropic said the incidents involved an unreleased internal research test model, alongside its Opus 4.7 and Mythos 5 models.

Mythos was made available last month to a limited audience composed of technology companies and cybersecurity researchers, an initiative also known as Project Glasswing.

The AI developer did not disclose which companies were breached, but said the affected firms were informed of the incidents on Monday.

Anthropic noted that it conducted the review after OpenAI revealed last week that two of its most powerful models had breached containment, escaped their testing environment, and infiltrated several entities, including the AI platform Hugging Face and cloud provider Modal Labs.

System misconfiguration allowed internet access

Anthropic stated that it examined more than 140,000 tests to find evidence of whether Claude could gain access to the internet from test environments designed to be isolated.

The evaluations included “capture-the-flag” exercises, in which Claude was instructed to breach other systems to obtain information. This is a method frequently used by experts to assess a model’s hacking capabilities.

The San Francisco-based company stated that a “misconfiguration” in systems operated by Anthropic and its testing partner left the models with live internet access, enabling them to infiltrate external systems.

Anthropic said it approached remediation efforts “with full ownership of the responsibility.”

Neither Anthropic nor the affected organizations detected the unauthorized entries at the time they occurred.

Anthropic added that it may examine its logs more extensively, noting that the findings gave the company “cautious optimism” that such risks can be overcome through increased investment and more stringent safeguards.

David Allott, a cybersecurity expert, told the BBC: “The overarching lesson here is not that AI has developed fundamentally new attack vectors.”

“Instead, it means that AI agents can combine capabilities, acquire credentials and system access to act autonomously, while adapting scope and scale at machine speed,” Allott said.

The developments come as technology companies invest billions of dollars to develop AI agents capable of independently executing a range of tasks, from research and customer support to cybersecurity.

Continue Reading

America

Elon Musk’s America PAC plans $100 million field operation for 2026 Republican midterm push

Published

on

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is returning to the political spending arena with a new field program designed to help elect Republicans in at least eight states ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Musk has authorized his political action committee, America PAC, to spend between $100 million and $120 million on a new ground game focused on conservative voter turnout for the 2026 midterms, according to a Thursday report by The New York Times, which cited two unnamed sources informed about the plans.

America PAC funneled more than $250 million into Donald Trump’s reelection campaign in 2024, a expenditure that established Musk as the largest political donor in US history.

The New York Times reported that America PAC is reviving its spending initiatives and has reached out to other Republicans in recent weeks regarding the new field operations.

The effort is also being coordinated with other Republican Party spending groups, according to the report.

The newspaper identified targeted Senate races in the states of Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, and Ohio, while noting that discussions are also underway regarding contests in North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas.

The political action committee is additionally expected to deploy funds for House of Representatives elections in Washington, Wisconsin, and California.

The news comes a day after Axios first reported that America PAC’s operations were resuming, with a focus on driving Republican turnout during the non-presidential election cycle.

A spokesperson for America PAC declined to comment on The New York Times report but confirmed the Axios reporting to The Hill. The spokesperson stated that the spending group was “excited” to contribute to efforts to maintain the Republican majorities in Congress this fall.

“The President’s political team and the rest of the GOP apparatus have built a world-class operation that has Republicans well-positioned to make history and retain control of Congress this fall,” America PAC spokesperson Andrew Romeo said in a statement. “We’re excited to be part of the team again.”

The campaign will reportedly target Republican voters through door-to-door canvassing, mailers, and digital advertisements, enabling other groups to concentrate their resources on television advertising.

The developments were reported days after Musk told The Economist magazine that he had gotten “carried away” during his brief foray into politics.

The SpaceX CEO entered the political arena during the 2024 election, pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into Trump’s presidential campaign and accompanying the candidate on the campaign trail.

Musk went on to lead Trump’s cost-cutting initiative, known as the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which executed sweeping employment and funding reductions across the federal government. Those efforts sparked controversy for Musk and his enterprise empire, including Tesla, whose shares fell sharply during his period of political involvement.

Musk departed the White House in late May 2025, and DOGE officially terminated its operations on July 4.

Shortly after leaving government, Musk and Trump engaged in a public dispute over the president’s sweeping spending legislation, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” During the friction, Musk threatened to form a third party, though the initiative never materialized.

Musk and the US President appeared to resolve their differences last year, with the tech billionaire most recently joining Trump alongside other technology leaders on a trip to China in May.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey