US strikes on Iran triggered by Israel’s plan to launch attack, Rubio says | US foreign policy
Israel’s determination to attack Iran and the certainty that U.S. troops would be targeted in response forced the Trump administration to launch preemptive strikes, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said, in a new explanation for Washington’s surprise entry into the conflict.
That rationale drew mixed opinions from key members of Congress who received the Trump administration’s first briefing Monday evening since it ordered the air campaign to begin over the weekend.
Rubio; CIA Director John Ratcliffe; and Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chairman Dan Caine; spoke with lawmakers behind closed doors at the Capitol ahead of an expected vote later this week in the House of Representatives on a war powers resolution that presents an unlikely opportunity to force Trump to end hostilities against Iran.
“It was abundantly clear that if Iran was attacked by anyone — the United States, Israel or anyone else — they would react and retaliate against the United States,” Rubio told reporters at the Capitol.
“We knew there would be Israeli action. We knew it would precipitate an attack on American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t preemptively pursue them before they launched these attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.”
Since the start of the conflict, the United States and Israel have carried out waves of airstrikes across Iran, and Tehran has responded with drone and missile attacks against U.S.-aligned countries in the Middle East.
The air campaign killed several of Iran’s top military and political leaders, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The US military acknowledged the deaths of six service members, while the Iranian Red Crescent Society said more than 500 people had been killed in the country.
Reactions to the administration’s explanation for going to war have split along party lines, with Republicans rushing to defend Trump’s strategy while Democrats have condemned what they see as an unnecessary conflict with unclear goals.
“This is Trump’s war. It’s a war of choice. He has no strategy, he has no endgame,” Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said before appearing at the press briefing.
As he exited, Schumer said the lawmakers present had asked “a lot of questions,” but he found the officials’ responses “completely and utterly insufficient. In fact, at least for me, this briefing raised many more questions than it answered.”
Mark Warner, Democratic vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he was concerned about the implications of the United States allowing Israel to force it into a new war.
“There was no imminent threat to the United States of America from the Iranians. There was a threat to Israel. If we equate a threat to Israel to the equivalent of an imminent threat to the United States, then we are in uncharted territory,” Warner said.
On Monday evening, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Fox News that Iran had built new underground sites “that will immunize its ballistic missile programs and its atomic bomb programs within months.”
“If no action was taken now, no action could be taken in the future,” he said.
Iran denies wanting to acquire nuclear weapons.
In recent media interviews, Trump has outlined various goals of the war, including destroying Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities and its navy, preventing the country from developing a nuclear weapon, and cutting off Tehran’s support for proxy forces elsewhere in the Middle East.
Rubio, however, mentioned only two goals to reporters: destroying Iran’s ballistic missile capability and its navy. Following the classified briefing, Warner said he was unsure of Trump’s endgame.
“I think the president needs to stand before Congress, and indeed before the American people, and decide, of the four or five goals that have been set, what is the real goal?” said the senator from Virginia.
“What is the goal? What is our exit plan? What obligation do we have now to the Iranian people if they rise up, based on their call to take to the streets? And what is the imminent threat to the United States’ interest in provoking this conflict?”
Mike Johnson, Republican Speaker of the House and close Trump ally, defended the president’s course of action, saying he had ordered a “defensive operation.”
“Israel was determined to act in its own defense here, with or without American support. Why? Because Israel faced what it considers an existential threat,” Johnson said.
Although the goal of the war, he said, was not “to go in and overthrow the regime,” he nonetheless welcomed the ayatollah’s death.
“It has happened and in my opinion it is a great development for freedom-loving people around the world,” Johnson told reporters, speaking alongside the Republican chairmen of the House Intelligence and Appropriations Committee – the latter’s presence indicates that lawmakers may soon be asked to approve additional defense funding necessitated by the war.
Trump ordered the attack on Iran without first seeking authorization from Congress, although Rubio said a group of lawmakers known as the Gang of Eight — made up of the Democratic and Republican leaders in each chamber, as well as top lawmakers from both parties on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees — were briefed before the attack began.
The House is expected to consider a war powers resolution later this week that, if passed, would force Trump to end hostilities against Iran. He faces a high bar to pass. Republicans control both houses of Congress and rarely counter Trump in significant numbers.
Even if Congress were to approve the resolution, Trump could veto it, and Congress could only override it with a two-thirds majority.
Previous war powers resolutions introduced in Congress were rejected, and Johnson expressed confidence that the latest one would not pass the House.
“The idea that we could take away right now the ability of our commander in chief, the president, his authority to complete this work, is a frightening prospect to me. It’s dangerous,” Johnson said. “I’m certainly hopeful and I believe we have the votes to reject it.”
