Donald Trump is navigating a delicate balance by claiming full awareness of Israel’s plans to launch massive airstrikes against Iran while simultaneously distancing the US from the strikes and denying any active US involvement in the preparations. The White House’s messaging has undergone a rapid shift, from describing the Israeli attack as a “unilateral action” to Trump asserting his full knowledge of the operation and framing it as a response to Iran’s failure to make a deal on its nuclear program within a 60-day ultimatum.

Trump’s narrative portrays a good cop-bad cop dynamic with Benjamin Netanyahu, emphasizing his efforts to pressure Iran into negotiations. However, the discordant US response to the strikes, including conflicting statements and uncertainty over US involvement in Israel’s defense, has raised questions about Israel potentially outpacing the Trump administration’s diplomatic approach.

While Israel provided advanced warning to the US about the strike, speculation surrounds the extent of Trump’s involvement and whether he strategically positioned himself to present the strikes as part of a coherent strategy. The US evacuation of personnel and resupply of missiles for Israel’s defense indicate a level of preparedness for potential escalation.

Amidst these developments, lingering uncertainties remain about the true intentions behind the Israeli strikes and the extent of US knowledge and involvement in the lead-up to the attack. The intricate dynamics between the US, Israel, and Iran underscore a complex geopolitical landscape with potentially significant ramifications for regional stability and diplomatic relations.