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Reuters with an adviser close to Trump and with sources familiar with the decision-making process offer a previously unpublished account of how the administration is navigating what has become the largest US military operation since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.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

US wealthy demolish multimillion-dollar mansions for land

Published

on

Wealthy buyers in the US are tearing down multimillion-dollar homes shortly after purchasing them for hundreds of millions of dollars.

According to a report by The Wall Street Journal, the trend is driven by a shortage of land in prestigious locations, particularly along coastlines.

For ultra-wealthy buyers, the prime factor has become the land’s location rather than the structure standing on it. After the acquired properties are flattened, newer, more modern homes are built on the cleared lots.

Drawing attention to the shift in the luxury real estate market, the report noted:

“The home itself, formerly the primary driver of an expensive real estate purchase, is now almost beside the point. Buyers are competing first and foremost for well-located land, situated on the ocean or a mountaintop.”

The newspaper cited moves by US billionaire William Lauder as an example. Lauder purchased the oceanfront estate of radio host Rush Limbaugh, who died in March 2023, for $155 million and had it completely demolished in July.

Lauder had previously torn down two homes situated on roughly 1.2 hectares of land along the Palm Beach coast. Having initially planned to construct his own residence on the parcel, Lauder subsequently sold the cleared plot for approximately $200 million.

Jonathan Miller, a real estate appraiser, stated that such transactions are becoming increasingly common as land prices rise.

Amid this momentum, estate agents have also begun marketing luxury homes directly as teardown lots.

Listings use artificial intelligence-generated imagery to showcase how the land would look without the structures on it.

Marketers avoid using the word “demolition” directly, resorting instead to terms such as “adaptive reuse”.

Teardown listings rise across luxury housing market

The trend is not confined to the coast and is spreading to other regions across the US.

Data from property brokerage Redfin reveals that references to demolishing buildings are becoming more frequent in sales listings.

The share of such listings exceeds 15% in the Bunker Hill Village area of Houston, while standing at 6.67% in Pimmit Hills, Virginia.

Dina Goldenteyer, a real estate agent working in Miami, remarked that serial demolitions have become more frequent because buyers no longer appreciate homes older than a decade.

Former retail executives Jamie Dooley and Christine Scott spent $3.7 million in 2020 to demolish a seaside home near Destin, Florida.

Although the couple spent five years building a modern home on the cleared site, they listed the resulting new structure with a demolition condition, citing the fact that no one wanted to buy the property as it stood.

William Paddock, an employee at the environmental consultancy WAP Sustainability, pointed to the environmental damage caused by this construction cycle.

Paddock emphasized that tearing down a home of roughly 1,000 square metres and replacing it with a new building of approximately 2,700 square metres generates a carbon footprint equivalent to the annual emissions of an average 250 American households.

Continue Reading

America

US inflation reaches 3.7% as midterm election campaign intensifies

Published

on

An uptick in September inflation as the US midterm elections approach has pushed the cost-of-living debate back to the centre of the agenda for Democrats seeking to regain control of Congress from Republicans.

Annual inflation stood at 3.7% in September, according to the Consumer Price Index published by the Bureau of Labour Statistics, with energy, petrol, and electricity costs rising on a monthly basis.

Food prices remained flat from August to September, recording a 2.5% increase compared with the same period last year.

Democrats are anchoring their election campaigns to pledges of easing the cost of living, blaming the price increases on President Donald Trump’s tariffs and the war with Iran.

Trump and Republicans, pointing to the numerous left-wing candidates who won primary elections this year, contend that the opposition has become captive to “communists” within the party.

When annual inflation stood at 2.4% in February, the US and Israel launched the Iran war on the final day of that month, and prices continued to climb throughout the conflict.

The recent acceleration has not entirely reversed the retreat from the 40-year peak of 9.1% recorded in June 2022; however, the rate has remained above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target for over five years.

Fed policymakers raised the benchmark interest rate by a quarter of a percentage point last month, citing the battle against stubborn inflation. Officials will convene again next week to consider whether to raise rates or hold them within the 3.75% to 4% target range.

Energy and fuel record sharpest increase since first month of war

In September, energy prices posted their largest monthly jump since March, the first full month of the war with Iran, climbing 20.4% year-on-year. Energy costs had risen 2.1% from July to August, after falling 1.5% from June to July and 5.7% from May to June.

Recent escalations in Iranian attacks on oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, alongside more frequent strikes by Ukrainian forces against Russian refineries, have strained global crude oil and refined product markets, driving up US petrol and diesel prices.

Petrol prices also recorded their sharpest monthly increase since the first month of the war, climbing 9.1% from August to September, bringing the annual increase to 35.3%.

American Automobile Association (AAA) data shows the average price of regular petrol across the US stands at $4.26 per gallon; while below the level of roughly $4.48 recorded a month ago, it remains more than $1.20 higher than a year earlier. Average gallon prices exceed $6 in California and $5 in both Washington state and Nevada.

Electricity prices rose 0.2% from August to September, offsetting the 0.2% decline between July and August, and were up 4.4% year-on-year.

Heavy power demand from new data centres is feeding through into local household electricity bills. Trump argued that companies must cover the cost of the electricity required by their data centres themselves.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump claimed that he was requiring large data centres to generate their own power and feed the surplus back into the local grid, suggesting this could bring about “a major drop” in electricity prices.

Used vehicle market posts monthly rise as food costs stabilise

The cost of food at home fell 0.1% month-on-month in September, while dining out increased 0.2%.

Egg prices dropped to $2.27 a dozen, falling roughly 35% compared with September 2025 and remaining well below the 20-year peak of $6.23 recorded in March 2025.

Ground beef prices rose roughly 2.4% compared with September 2025, but at $6.48 a pound, they remained below the 20-year high of $6.98 reached in June.

Chicken held steady at its year-earlier level of $2.06 per pound last month, having fluctuated between $2.01 and $2.09 since November 2024.

Used car and truck prices fell 1.5% compared with September 2025, but rose 0.7% month-on-month in September following 0.4% increases in both July and August.

Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, noted that the sector faces severe pressure stemming from a combination of expensive replacement parts and a shortage of skilled labour.

Speaking to The Hill, Long emphasised that every cost pressure across the market is being felt directly at local auto repair shops.

Continue Reading

America

Anthropic posts $80.7bn loss ahead of IPO as computing costs soar

Published

on

Anthropic, developer of the artificial intelligence model Claude, reported a net loss of $80.7 billion for the first six months of 2026 ending 30 June.

According to a report by The Wall Street Journal citing the company’s draft initial public offering prospectus, this recorded loss nearly doubled the $42 billion loss incurred across the entirety of 2025.

The vast majority of that enormous figure, accounting for $72 billion, stemmed from accounting-driven book-value write-downs.

In contrast, the company saw a sharp surge in revenue, with turnover in the first half of the year climbing to $16.3 billion from $1.1 billion in the same period of the prior year.

During this period, Anthropic spent approximately $9 billion on computing power and infrastructure needs, surpassing in just six months the $7.3 billion spent across the whole of 2025.

The company has commitments to pay roughly $450 billion over the next seven to 10 years under cloud service contracts.

Under these obligations, contracts are planned for $111 billion with Google Cloud, $110 billion with Amazon Web Services, and $31 billion with Microsoft.

Anthropic will also spend up to $86 billion by 2033 and 2034, respectively, to lease Nvidia chips through smaller AI-focused cloud providers Nscale and Lambda.

The company could spend an additional $750 billion in the coming years to expand its computing capacity.

Roughly a third of the draft IPO prospectus was dedicated directly to risk factors.

The document highlighted the possibility that models could cause tangible real-world harm, noting that artificial intelligence could exhibit a “self-preservation” tendency and produce responses resembling “blackmail”.

Anthropic warned that the scale of damage caused by an AI-driven “catastrophic event” could render insuring against such risks impossible.

According to market expectations, Anthropic’s IPO could rank among the largest transactions in history, potentially surpassing SpaceX’s record.

Following the market debut, the company’s market valuation is projected to reach up to $2 trillion.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey