The campaign has not ended. We have shaken the regime.
Trump declared US military objectives in Iran achieved and set withdrawal timeline of 2-3 weeks, signaling potential de-escalation despite month-long conflict. Iran's president expressed willingness to end war if guarantees prevent future attacks; Pentagon chief stated coming days are 'decisive' with reduced enemy drone activity.
- Trump set 2-3 week withdrawal deadline for U.S. forces from Iran on day 32 of conflict
- Over 1 million displaced in Lebanon; at least 8 killed in single day of attacks; 3,000+ total deaths reported
- Iran's president expressed willingness to end war if guarantees prevent future attacks
- U.S. deployed 6,000+ sailors via USS George H.W. Bush carrier strike group; 1,500 additional paratroopers sent to region
- EU spent €14 billion extra on energy in first month of war; U.S. gas prices exceeded $4/gallon for first time since 2022
President Trump announced US forces will withdraw from Iran in two to three weeks after military objectives are met, while diplomatic negotiations advance and regional tensions persist with ongoing attacks.
On the thirty-second day of the war, President Trump announced that American forces would leave Iran within two or three weeks. The declaration came after the Pentagon's leadership signaled optimism about ceasefire negotiations, even as military operations continued to intensify across the region. Bombs fell on Iranian military installations, power plants, and religious sites. The message was clear: the United States believed it had accomplished what it set out to do, and now it was time to go.
Trump's timeline sent immediate ripples through global markets. Asian stock exchanges opened sharply higher—Tokyo's Nikkei rose more than 4 percent, Seoul's Kospi climbed over 6 percent, and Shanghai gained 1.42 percent. Oil prices fell as traders interpreted the withdrawal announcement as a signal that the worst might be over. The Brent crude contract for June delivery dropped 3.18 percent to just under $104 a barrel. Yet beneath this apparent optimism lay a more complicated reality. The Pentagon chief, Pete Hegseth, warned that the coming days would be "decisive," and he made clear that if Iran wanted to negotiate, it needed to do so quickly. "If Iran is smart, they'll make a deal," Hegseth said. "The president doesn't bluff and doesn't back down."
Iran's response suggested some willingness to talk. President Masud Pezeshkian told the European Council president that his country possessed the will to end the war, but only if it received guarantees that future attacks would not occur. The statement was carefully worded—not a surrender, but an opening. It was enough to move markets, enough to give diplomats something to work with. Yet even as these signals emerged, the fighting did not pause. Israeli forces struck a chemical research facility they said was supplying weapons materials to Iran. American and Israeli warplanes hit the old U.S. embassy building in Tehran, now a museum dedicated to anti-American sentiment. The ancient structure, seized by students in 1979 and held for 444 days while American diplomats were held hostage, bore new scars.
The human toll continued to mount. At least eight people died in southern Lebanon on a single day—three in the district of Tyre, four in Sidón, and one paramedic at a rescue gathering in Bint Jbeil. Fourteen Israelis were wounded when Iran fired a cluster-bomb-equipped ballistic missile at the city of Bnei Brak; among the injured was an eleven-year-old girl struck by shrapnel. In Lebanon alone, more than one million people had been displaced. The Lebanese army announced it was repositioning units in the south after Israeli ground operations had surrounded and isolated their positions, cutting off supply lines.
Trump's rhetoric grew sharper as the week progressed. He told allies to "go get their own oil" and declared that protecting the Strait of Hormuz—through which roughly one-fifth of the world's crude and liquefied natural gas flows—was no longer America's responsibility. "That's not our business," he said. "That will be for France. That will be for whoever is using the strait." Secretary of State Marco Rubio went further, suggesting the United States should "reexamine" its relationship with NATO after Spain closed its airspace to American military aircraft and Italy denied use of a strategic base. The message was unmistakable: allies who would not fully support the operation could not expect American protection.
Yet even as Trump spoke of withdrawal, the military buildup continued. The USS George H.W. Bush, a carrier strike group carrying more than 6,000 sailors, was en route to the Middle East. Thousands of soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division were arriving in theater, including about 1,500 paratroopers sent specifically to reinforce the region. The Pentagon had attacked more than 11,000 targets in thirty days. The scale of the operation was staggering, and its end, despite Trump's two-to-three-week timeline, remained uncertain.
Gulf allies—Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Bahrain—were pushing back privately against any quick exit. They saw this moment as a historic opportunity to cripple the Iranian regime decisively, and they did not want Washington to leave the job half-finished. Meanwhile, the economic damage was spreading globally. The European Union had spent an extra 14 billion euros on energy imports in the first month of war alone. Gas prices in the United States had climbed above four dollars a gallon for the first time since 2022. The Strait of Ormuz remained partially blocked, threatening shipping and driving up costs worldwide. Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, declared that the campaign against Iran was far from over. "The campaign has not ended," he said. "We have shaken the regime." He spoke of new alliances forming in the region, of secret and public meetings with Middle Eastern leaders. The war, it seemed, had only just begun, even as Trump was already planning its conclusion.
Citas Notables
If Iran is smart, they'll make a deal. The president doesn't bluff and doesn't back down.— Pete Hegseth, U.S. Secretary of Defense
We have the will to end this war, provided that the necessary guarantees are established to prevent any repetition of aggression.— Masud Pezeshkian, President of Iran
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did Trump set such a specific timeline—two or three weeks—when military operations are still ongoing?
It's a signal to multiple audiences at once. To the markets, it says stability is coming. To Iran, it says negotiate now or face continued bombardment. To his own military, it sets a deadline that forces decisions. But the specificity also creates pressure on himself—if things don't go according to plan, he looks weak.
The Pentagon chief says the coming days are "decisive," but Trump is already talking about leaving. Doesn't that contradict?
Not really. Hegseth is saying Iran has a narrow window to accept terms before the military situation becomes irreversible. Once that window closes, there's nothing left to negotiate. Trump's withdrawal timeline is the deadline for that window.
Iran's president said he wants to end the war but needs guarantees. What does that actually mean?
It means Iran won't simply accept defeat and hope the U.S. doesn't attack again in six months. They want something written down, something binding. The problem is Trump has shown he doesn't honor agreements he inherits from previous administrations. Why would Iran trust him?
The Gulf states are privately pushing for more war. How does that factor in?
It's the real constraint on Trump's timeline. If he leaves too soon, he risks alienating the regional partners who've been supporting the operation. But if he stays too long, the costs keep rising—economically, diplomatically, militarily. He's caught between two clocks.
What about the people being displaced and killed? Does that factor into these calculations?
In the official statements, not much. Over a million displaced in Lebanon, thousands dead across the region. But when you're talking about geopolitics and market signals, those numbers become abstractions. They're real to the families involved, invisible to the people making decisions.