US Denies Reuters Report That Trump Warned Iran Of Imminent Strikes

Update: According to the Washington Post, citing a senior US official and the head of Iranian media services, Iran was not, in fact, notified prior to the strikes.

When asked about the Reuters report, a senior U.S. administration official said the United States never sent a message to Iran via the Omanis. The country at the eastern corner of the Arabian peninsula has long been an interlocutor between the West and Iran, but not on this occasion, the official said.

“It is a complete lie and propaganda from Iran,” the official said. Earlier Friday, the head of Iranian media services told NBC News that the Reuters report was inaccurate. He said such a message from the United States was never sent and the content of the messages is also false.

********************

Original:

Donald Trump appears to believe that Iran is no different from North Korea when it comes to using military threats and economic pressure to compel the country’s leadership to agree to a high-profile sit-down.

The US warned Iran that strikes were imminent in a message delivered through Oman, Reuters reported, citing Iranian officials who said Trump expressed a desire to avoid a confrontation.

“In his message, Trump said he was against any war with Iran and wanted to talk to Tehran about various issues”, one of the officials said.

Trump approved strikes on radar and missile batteries on Thursday, but called them off at the last minute. According to the New York Times, “planes were in the air and ships were in position” by the time the president told everyone to stand down.

Read more: ‘Planes Were In The Air’: Trump Called Off Iran Strikes At Last Minute On Thursday Night

Needless to say, the decision to talk to Trump (or not) isn’t up to any “officials” (or “loose, stupid generals”, as Trump would call them). Although the governmental structure in Tehran is more nuanced than that which exists in Pyongyang, there is only one person who can ultimately green light any high-level negotiations, and according to the officials who spoke to Reuters, he isn’t in a conciliatory mood.

“[Trump] gave a short period of time to get our response but Iran’s immediate response was that it is up to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to decide about this issue”, one official told Reuters, adding that “we made it clear that the leader is against any talks, but the message will be conveyed to him to make a decision.”

Right. In other words: “We’ll give him the message, but you know and we know what he’s going to say”.

(And, really, why would he agree to talks with Trump who, in addition to pulling the US out of an agreement with which Iran was complying, recently threatened to slap tariffs on America’s southern neighbor at a time when Congress is working to pass a deal designed to avoid the imposition of those very same type of tariffs? That is, Trump has proven himself to be a man who negotiates in bad faith and that means everyone from Canada to Europe to Iran to China is going to be wary of sitting down with him.)

This raises questions about whether Trump’s decision to call off the strikes was in part informed by something he did or didn’t hear in Iran’s immediate response.

The officials also said they asked Oman to tell Trump that any strikes on Iran would “have regional and international consequences”.

Hopefully, Trump understands everything that entails. Although it’s not clear what it would mean for the Houthis to “step up” their attacks on targets inside Saudi Arabia considering they’re lobbing projectiles into the Kingdom daily already, those attacks would be intensified to the extent they could be. Hezbollah would likely lash out at Israel. Qassem Soleimani’s proxy armies in Iraq would probably launch a string of attacks on US interests in the country. There would likely be more maritime incidents near the Strait of Hormuz. And all of that is to say nothing of the possibility that the Kremlin might ultimately deliver some kind of ultimatum demanding a cessation to US attacks on Iranian soil.

Perhaps most importantly, it’s not clear what Trump wants out of this situation. His ritual castigating of the nuclear accord as a “horrible deal” never included much in the way of an alternative plan, and since the US unilaterally pulled out of the agreement, Washington’s “strategy” has revolved solely around crippling Iran’s economy without a well-articulated vision for what the president hopes to achieve.

Obviously, Trump’s Iran “plan” isn’t really a plan or, to the extent it is, it’s evolving according to the dictates of notorious Iran hawks Mike Pompeo and John Bolton, and doubtlessly being influenced from abroad by Israel and the Saudis, whose opinion on the matter simply cannot be taken at face value for obvious reasons.

One thing seems certain: If Trump is hoping for some kind of farcical photo op “summit” with Khamenei akin to the spectacles with Kim in Singapore and Hanoi, he can forget it.

Earlier this month, during Shinzo Abe’s trip to Iran, Khamenei reportedly said “I do not see Trump as worthy of any message exchange, and I do not have any reply for him, now or in future”.

That would appear to be that, as it were.