FT: Trump Blocked Netanyahu’s Reported 10 October Strike Plan on Iran Over U.S. Election Concerns
The Financial Times reports that Benjamin Netanyahu prepared a multi‑day air operation for 10 October against Iranian nuclear sites, power plants and other infrastructure, but Donald Trump blocked the plan over fears of a new war weeks before the 3 November U.S. midterm elections.
Israeli leaders reportedly drew up plans for a sweeping air campaign against Iran in October, only for the operation to be stopped after intervention from Washington. The Financial Times reports that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu planned a major attack for 10 October, with strikes over several days on Iran’s nuclear facilities, power plants and other infrastructure.
According to the FT account, then‑U.S. President Donald Trump blocked the move because he feared a renewed war shortly before the 3 November midterm elections in the United States. The described operation would have gone far beyond a single raid, aiming at nuclear sites and wider infrastructure in Iran.
Israeli officials have long said they reserve the option of unilateral action against Iran’s nuclear programme if they believe it is approaching weapons capability. A plan that includes nuclear facilities, power plants and other infrastructure suggests an attempt to weaken Iran’s broader capacity, not only its nuclear work, and would have been likely to provoke retaliation.
For people inside Iran, such an attack would risk damage around energy and industrial facilities and could disrupt power and basic services. Civilian workers at those sites would be directly exposed. In Israel, the expectation would be missile and drone salvos from Iran and allied groups.
The episode also sits against open disagreements in Washington over how to handle Iran. Former U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan has said he does not think the war with Iran is in U.S. national interests and has called it a “folly from the start.” He argues that airstrikes can set back Iran’s nuclear programme but leave enriched uranium, centrifuges and scientists in place, and says a verifiable block on Iran’s pathway to nuclear weapons requires a deal.
Sullivan has described what he calls a divergence between Israeli and U.S. interests, saying Netanyahu has talked about wanting a “forever war” with Iran and noting that the Israeli leader is less concerned about disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, which affects American consumers more directly. Those remarks, alongside the FT report of a blocked strike plan, point to a gap between an Israeli government willing to contemplate a large operation and a U.S. administration wary of the consequences.
For the wider region, any Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities and infrastructure would raise fears about shipping in the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, through which significant volumes of oil pass. Even limited military activity near key shipping lanes can push up insurance costs and fuel prices.
The FT account suggests that U.S. domestic politics, including the timing of elections, play into decisions with major foreign‑policy consequences. Future signals to watch include whether Israel revisits similar plans under different political conditions and whether there is any renewed diplomatic movement on Iran’s nuclear file that might change the calculus for military action.
Sources
- OSINT