Closing summary
This brings our live coverage of the second Trump administration to a close for the day, but our colleagues in Australia continue to cover the Israeli attack on Iran in real time. Here are some of the day’s main developments in US politics:
Despite Donald Trump’s claim that Iran was “very close” to having a nuclear weapon when Israel launched its bombing campaign, Mark Warner, the vice-chairman of the US Senate intelligence committee, told MSNBC that senators were briefed on Monday that US intelligence agencies still see no evidence that Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons.
Donald Trump said he has still has not made a decision on whether to join Israel’s attack on Iran, but repeated Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim that Iran was “weeks away” from developing a nuclear weapon.
Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell cautioned that officials expect tariffs imposed by Trump to increase prices over the course of the summer. His comments came as the Fed kept interest rates on hold, but signaled it might make two cuts this year, as Trump continues to demand lower rates.
As Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, was cross-examined by the senate armed services committee, an official defense department social media account, DOD Rapid Response, posted a series of attacks on Democratic senators on X.
Top senate Democrats insisted that Trump needs congressional authorization for any attack on Iran, echoing the 2002 debate in congress over the US attack on Iraq. A star witness that year, who urged congress to back war in Iraq as a way to achieve regime change in Iran, was Benjamin Netanyahu.
Top Democrats insist that Congress must be consulted before any US attack on Iran
Five top senate Democrats said in a statement on Wednesday that Donald Trump “must consult Congress and seek authorization if he is considering taking the country to war” against Iran, and demanded “a clear, detailed plan outlining the goals, risks, cost, and timeline for any proposed mission”.
The joint statement, from senators Chris Coons, Chuck Schumer, Patty Murray, Jack Reed and Mark Warner expressed strong support for Israel, but cast doubt on the Trump administration’s preparations for war.
“As President Trump reportedly considers expanding U.S. engagement in the war, we are deeply concerned about a lack of preparation, strategy, and clearly defined objectives, and the enormous risk to Americans and civilians in the region. Iran has signaled that it would retaliate against American personnel if the United States participates in military strikes”, the senators wrote.
“We are alarmed by the Trump administration’s failure to provide answers to fundamental questions. By law, the president must consult Congress and seek authorization if he is considering taking the country to war. He owes Congress and the American people a strategy for U.S. engagement in the region. We need a clear, detailed plan outlining the goals, risks, cost, and timeline for any proposed mission, as well as how he will ensure the safe evacuation of Americans in harm’s way all across the region.”
Among the specific questions the Democrats demanded answers to were these: “What is the Intelligence Community’s current assessment of Iran’s nuclear program, its leaders’ intent, and its capabilities?” and, “What would be the objective of U.S. military intervention against Iran? President Trump has called for Iran’s ‘unconditional surrender’ – what does that mean?”
The demand for congressional authorization, and the concern that the president’s claims about Iran’s nuclear program might not be supported by US intelligence assessments echo the 2002 debate in congress over the resolution to authorize the use of military force to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction it did not, in fact, possess.
In that context, it is worth noting that both Schumer and Warner voted for the Iraq war resolution, in October 2002, Murray and Reed voted against it. (Coons was not yet a senator in 2002, but his seat was held at the time by Joe Biden, who voted to authorize the use of force).
In the weeks leading up to that vote, one House committee heard expert testimony on the possible impact of a US invasion of Iraq on the Middle East from an Israeli expert, Benjamin Netanyahu.
Given that it is Netanyahu’s war on Iran that Donald Trump is now thinking about joining, the Israeli leader’s wildly inaccurate prediction of how the Middle East would be transformed for the better by a US invasion of Iraq might be worth considering.
Looking back at his 2002 testimony now, it is striking that Netanyahu linked his strong support for a US invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein with the possibility of inspiring the implosion of the ruling theocracy in neighboring Iran.
“It’s not a question of whether Iraq’s regime should be taken out but when should it be taken out; it’s not a question of whether you’d like to see a regime change in Iran but how to achieve it,” Netanyahu told US lawmakers on 12 September 2002.
The American-educated Israeli leader, who was then between terms as prime minister, even suggested that Iran was so ripe for revolt that just seeing American television shows could do the trick — although he had some trouble recalling the name of one of the programs he proposed using as a weapon.
Netanyahu recalled that he had once advised the Central Intelligence Agency “that if you want to advance regime change in Iran, you don’t have to go through the CIA cloak-and-dagger stuff — what you want to do is take very large, very strong transponders and just beam Melrose Place and Beverly Hills 2050 and all that into Tehran and into Iran, because that is subversive stuff. They watch it — the young kids watch it, the young people. They want to have the same nice clothes and the same houses and swimming pools and so on”.
“So the question now is: choose. You can beam Melrose Place, but it may take a long time. On the other hand, if you take out Saddam, Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region. And I think that people sitting right next door in Iran, young people, and many others, will say the time of such regimes, of such despots is gone.”
"If you take out Saddam," Netanyahu told Congress in 2002, "I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region. And I think that people sitting right next door in Iran... will say the time of such regimes, of such despots is gone." pic.twitter.com/ZNTxpSP3a2
— Robert Mackey (@RobertMackey) February 14, 2019
Updated
