The Memo: Hazy messaging deepens Trump’s political challenges on Iran

Turbulence in President Trump’s messaging on the war in Iran has deepened this week, with the commander-in-chief and his aides toggling between implying the conflict could be nearing a close and striking a more belligerent tone.

The most striking example came on Monday when the president gave a phone interview to CBS News in which he said the war was “very complete, pretty much.” 

Markets immediately rallied — and oil prices fell — on the idea that an end to the conflict might be within sight. But just hours later, Trump adopted a much tougher line on social media, threatening to hit Iran “twenty times harder” than the U.S. has up to now if the Strait of Hormuz is blocked. 

The strait is crucial for global shipping, and for oil in particular. Around 20 percent of the world’s oil moves through the narrow channel off the southern coast of Iran. 

The strategic struggle over the strait became even more combustible on Tuesday, amid reporting that Iran had begun laying mines within the shipping lanes.

The speculation nudged Trump to take to social media on Tuesday afternoon, where he demanded that any such devices be “removed, IMMEDIATELY!” 

He elucidated further that, if this did not happen, “the Military consequences to Iran will be at a level never seen before,” whereas if mines were indeed removed, “it will be a giant step in the right direction!”

Trump’s more accommodating messages, such as the one delivered in the CBS News phone call, have at times sat uneasily with the line from elsewhere in his administration. 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in a “60 Minutes” interview broadcast on Sunday that U.S. actions thus far are “just the beginning.”  At a Tuesday morning news conference accompanied by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, Hegseth pledged it would be “our most intense day of strikes inside Iran.”

The war has not prompted Trump to make any change to his long-established, idiosyncratic way of expressing himself — a habit that sometimes leaves his exact meaning unclear.

For example, at a Monday press conference, he said of the military offensive that the U.S. began on February 28, in conjunction with Israel, “We could call it a tremendous success right now, as we leave here, I could call it. Or we could go further, and we’re going to go further.”

On Tuesday, the financial markets seemed to be unsure what to make of it all. The Dow Jones and the S&P 500 closed in the red, but only by negligible amounts. 

The price of oil oscillated across a wide range, from a high of around $90 a barrel to a low of around $78. The oil price didn’t come close to the highs it touched earlier this week, amid fears of big economic shocks as a result of the war.

Still, the lack of clarity from the administration affects a number of important political issues.

For example, in the early days of the conflict, Secretary of State Marco Rubio implied that the U.S. had been, in effect, forced into military action because Israel was determined to attack Iran, and there were fears that the Islamic Republic would retaliate against U.S. interests.

Those remarks, which Rubio tried to clean up, caused a furor — including among conservative commentators who have become increasingly vocal about what they view as undue influence by Israel on U.S. policies.

Hegseth was asked broadly about this issue during his Tuesday morning press conference by a reporter from The Gateway Pundit, usually a very pro-Trump outlet.

Asked what he would say to those Americans who support Trump but “who worry that Israel might be taking advantage of the U.S.’s backing,” Hegseth insisted: “We’re not getting pulled in any direction. We’re leading. The president is leading.”

To be sure, the White House would argue that it has been clear on four key objectives of the war. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has enunciated these on more than one occasion. 

In summary, they are inflicting serious destruction on the Iranian Navy, degrading or destroying its ballistic missile capability, putting a nuclear weapon definitively beyond reach, and making it impossible for Iran to continue backing radical proxies in the region.

Other points are, at best, more nebulous, however.

At Tuesday’s White House media briefing, Leavitt sought to explain Trump’s definition of the “unconditional surrender” that the president wants to see from the Islamic Republic before the current assault would be brought to a close.

“When President Trump says that Iran is in a place of unconditional surrender, he’s not claiming the Iranian regime is going to come out and say that themselves,” Leavitt said, going on to explain how part of the criteria would be whether the Islamic Republic still had a ballistic missile arsenal or realistic plans for a nuclear weapon.

“President Trump will determine when Iran is in a place of unconditional surrender, when they no longer pose a credible and direct threat to the United States of America and our allies.”

Relatedly, Leavitt and other Trump aides, as well as the president himself, have been reluctant to say that the U.S. attacks are aimed at forcing regime change in Tehran. This reluctance is widely assumed to be borne of fears that the terminology would echo that used by the administration of former President George W. Bush regarding the Iraq War.

For the moment, Trump and his aides are placing a lot of store in the effectiveness of the U.S. military. It is easily plausible that U.S. and Israeli forces will indeed topple the Islamic regime, and that the president will then claim victory and withdraw.

But for the moment, the fog of war seems to be creeping into many of the administration’s own explanations as to what is going on, and when and why it might end.

The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

More Administration News

Erika Kirk appointed to Air Force Academy board

Thune rejects Trump on SAVE Act: ‘The votes aren’t there for a talking ...

2 states approved permanent standard time. Others are hoping to do the same

Speaker Johnson floats using reconciliation to address alleged fraud in blue ...

Joe Rogan: Trump supporters ‘feel betrayed’ by ‘insane’ Iran war

Rand Paul: Midterms will be ‘disastrous’ for Republicans

Trump threatens to escalate attacks on Iran as US military destroys 10 ...

The return-to-the-office trend backfires

Trump job approval sinks in new poll

Trump’s exit strategy on Iran swirling with uncertainty

Noem’s ouster could pave way to reopen shuttered Homeland Security Department

GOP leaders, Trump see tensions flare over Senate filibuster

Trump tells Republicans the SAVE America Act will ‘guarantee the midterms’

Pentagon says 140 US service members wounded since Iran war started 

Live updates: Leavitt says US didn’t escort oil tanker through Strait of ...

Democratic senator says US ‘seem to be’ on path toward deploying American ...

Democrats vow to shut down Senate over Iran conflict

Retired Army general: Iran regime ‘fundamentally miscalculated’ Trump

© The Hill