America
Trump caught between hawks, markets, and his base as Iran war drags past initial timeline
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by Reuters with an adviser close to Trump and with sources familiar with the decision-making process offer a previously unpublished account of how the administration is navigating what has become the largest US military operation since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.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
Trump administration targets 60 nations with new tariff draft under Section 301
The US administration is proposing new tariffs of at least 10% on imports from 60 trading partners, following an investigation into goods allegedly produced using forced labor.
According to a Bloomberg report citing sources within the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), the specific tariff rates will vary based on individual countries’ legislative frameworks regarding forced labor and their capacity to enforce those laws.
Under the drafted regulations, a 10% tariff rate will apply to imports from the European Union, Mexico, Canada, the United Kingdom, Taiwan, and several other nations. Conversely, goods arriving from China, India, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, and Brazil will be subject to a 12,5% tariff.
The USTR stated that the lower tariff rate will apply to products from nations that prohibit forced labor or have committed to doing so. The agency emphasized that states failing to establish such prohibitions or lacking the capacity to effectively enforce them will face the higher tariff rate.
Bloomberg reported that this step represents a continuation of President Donald Trump’s policy to reinstate across-the-board tariffs on all countries, which had previously been ruled unconstitutional.
The proposed tariffs are the result of investigations initiated under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Commenting on the development, Deborah Elms, Head of the Trade Policy Group at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore, said, “This is highly significant because Section 301 is an extremely powerful tool and is highly unlikely to be overturned. This opens the door to a range of new tariff and non-tariff measures.”
The report noted that the tariffs are being introduced at what could be a turning point for the global economy.
Financial markets are already navigating a sensitive period due to rising gas and oil prices driven by conflict in Iran.
The new tariffs will not take effect immediately. Before implementation, a review and evaluation period will be conducted, which may lead to modifications in the draft proposal.
According to the timeline reported by Bloomberg, written comments on the tariffs must be submitted by July 6. Additionally, the Section 301 Committee is scheduled to hold a public hearing on July 7.
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer argued that forced labor practices in partner nations force American workers to compete on an unequal playing field. “We will no longer tolerate this unfairness,” Greer said.
On the other hand, the USTR proposed certain tariff exemptions that could affect apparel and textile imports. While these goods could enter the US at reduced tariff rates, quotas would be determined based on the respective countries’ existing textile exports to the US.
Beef, tomatoes, bananas, coffee, orange juice, and several other food products will be entirely exempt from the tariffs. Furthermore, double taxation will not be imposed on metals, specific fuel types, and chemicals that are already subject to other duties.
In May, the US Court of International Trade ruled that the 10% tariff on foreign imports promoted by President Donald Trump was unlawful. Defending the White House’s objectives following the court ruling, Trump characterized the judges as “radical left-wing” and remarked, “Nothing surprises me. We always find different ways. We make a decision and act in another way.”
In February, the US Supreme Court also ruled that tariffs established by Trump were contrary to the law. The court concluded that the president had exceeded his authority in imposing those duties. Trump, however, claimed that the court was under foreign influence.
America
Google seeks approval to release 32 million mosquitoes in US disease-control project
Google is seeking federal approval to release nearly 32 million mosquitoes in California and Florida as part of a biological pest-control initiative known as the Debug project.
The little-known program aims to combat disease-carrying mosquitoes by releasing millions of sterile male mosquitoes into the environment, an approach designed to stop “bad bugs with good bugs.”
According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), mosquitoes are classified as the world’s deadliest animals. Of the more than 3,500 mosquito species that exist globally, only Aedes aegypti is responsible for transmitting dengue fever, Zika virus and chikungunya, diseases that sicken hundreds of millions of people each year.
In a statement published on the official website of the Debug project, Google described the issue as a difficult problem to solve, noting that many mosquito-borne diseases lack effective vaccines or treatments.
The statement argued that relying on pesticides is not a sustainable solution because such chemicals become less effective over time and can be toxic. It also said that eliminating standing water alone is insufficient because it is impossible to identify every breeding site used by mosquitoes.
For those reasons, Google said a new approach is required and that it found a solution in what it describes as “good” mosquitoes of the same species.
The project website explains the method as follows:
“Good bugs are the same mosquito species as the bad bugs that spread disease. Our good bugs are male mosquitoes carrying Wolbachia, a naturally occurring bacterium found in nature. This bacterium prevents them from producing offspring with wild female mosquitoes. Male mosquitoes do not bite and cannot spread disease, so the good bugs will stop the bad bugs from reproducing. Over time, fewer bad mosquitoes will remain.”
Scientists involved in the Debug project emphasized that the technique relies entirely on a naturally occurring bacterium, contains no chemicals or toxins, and does not involve genetic modification.
Researchers said similar approaches have been used safely for decades to control other pests. They added that the Debug team is combining scientific and engineering expertise with support from international partners in an effort to suppress disease-carrying mosquito populations.
Project scientists said their approach differs from previous eradication programs because it applies the Sterile Insect Technique on a larger scale through the use of data analytics, sensors and automation.
According to information published in the project’s frequently asked questions section, program officials are working closely with national and local governments, community leaders and research institutions.
Officials said they meet with residents in areas targeted for deployment before operations begin in order to better understand local concerns and priorities.
Google is therefore continuing to pursue federal authorization to implement the project in both California and Florida.
A notice published in the Federal Register shows that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reviewing Google’s applications for an Experimental Use Permit under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
According to details contained in the filing, nearly 16 million mosquitoes would be released in Florida during the first year of the project.
A further 16 million mosquitoes would be released in California during the second year.
Members of the public can obtain additional information and submit comments through the federal rulemaking portal by visiting regulations.gov and entering docket identification number EPA-HQ-OPP-2025-3951.
America
US Marines test lower-cost counter-drone system to reduce missile dependence
US Marine Corps personnel tested a new counter-drone defense system during military exercises held in the Philippines in April.
According to a report by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), the system is designed to avoid the continuous use of expensive missiles and instead relies on a coordinated set of countermeasures.
The system consists of two armored vehicles known collectively as MADIS (Marine Air Defense Integrated System).
One vehicle is equipped with an advanced radar system, while the other carries the Stinger air defense missile system. Both vehicles are also fitted with a small cannon, a machine gun and electronic warfare equipment.
According to the report, MADIS is intended to provide military personnel with multiple options for engaging drones, including cannon fire, missiles and electronic warfare tools.
The objective is to reduce dependence on high-cost weapons when protecting military units and other strategic assets.
US Marine Corps officials told WSJ that one of the system’s most effective features is its ability to fire specially manufactured 30-millimeter ammunition equipped with precision fuzes that detonate as they approach a target.
Steven Sawyer, a former ammunition technician at the NATO Support and Procurement Agency, told the newspaper that 30-millimeter rounds are generally less accurate than missiles but are significantly cheaper to use.
Sawyer said that even if five such rounds were required to destroy a drone, the total cost would remain around $11,250.
By comparison, a single Stinger missile costs about $430,000, while Coyote interceptor missiles used in conflicts in the Middle East are priced between $100,000 and $125,000 each.
Sawyer added that 30-millimeter ammunition has proven effective against Shahed-family drones, which cannot be neutralized through electronic warfare methods.
At the same time, he stressed that US defense companies continue to face difficulties producing sufficient quantities of the ammunition. According to Sawyer, the precision fuzes are highly sophisticated electromechanical devices and only a limited number of manufacturers can produce them at scale.
WSJ noted that countering large numbers of inexpensive drones has become one of the most pressing challenges facing modern militaries.
The US military has encountered the problem directly during operations in the Middle East, where it has been forced to expend limited stocks of extremely costly precision-guided munitions.
Previously, the South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported that Chinese scientists had developed a combat algorithm known as HG-STR based on a “kill them all” concept.
The algorithm was said to enable swarms of fixed-wing drones to autonomously scan the battlefield and destroy enemy targets even if communications are disrupted and lines of sight are obstructed.
In April, The New York Times, citing three sources within defense and intelligence agencies, reported that the Pentagon assessed Russia’s and China’s drone development programs to be more advanced than those of the United States.
The assessment regarding China’s drone capabilities was reportedly based on analysis of a military parade held in China in September 2025.
-
Asia2 weeks agoIran conflict accelerates yuan adoption and record CIPS volumes in global oil trade
-
Asia2 weeks agoXi and Putin deepen partnership with call for ‘multipolar world’
-
Middle East1 week agoLeaked documents show IRGC routed Chinese military equipment through UAE
-
Europe2 weeks agoFive EU states push gradual single market access for Western Balkans
-
Europe1 week agoFrench justice minister calls for three-year halt to legal immigration
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoNATO weighs Hormuz security mission if Iran blockade remains in place by July
-
Middle East1 week agoIran says Hormuz transit will remain free but ships must cover operational costs
-
Europe2 weeks agoGermany initiates diplomatic contact with France’s National Rally ahead of presidential election
