Historia
1 de jul de 2026

Trump Advises Israel Against Retaliating to Iranian Strike

Following Iran's missile attack on Israel, President Donald Trump reportedly advised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against immediate retaliation. Trump stated his desire to avoid jeopardizing a potential diplomatic deal with Iran.

President Donald Trump’s reported warning to Israel not to hit back after Iran’s missile strike exposes a sharp tension in his own Iran strategy: a leader who has embraced high‑risk military escalation now urging restraint to protect a fragile diplomatic track.

Conservative reporting portrays Trump’s approach as a calculated mix of force and de-escalation. A Fox News analysis of the precision strike that killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei casts it as the pure expression of “President Trump’s whole doctrine in a single strike — he does not want a war,” combining a decapitation blow with an “off-ramp” for the regime. In this view, the U.S.-Israeli operation that destroyed only one wing of Khamenei’s compound is proof of strategic discipline rather than uncontrolled escalation.

The same conservative ecosystem presents Trump’s diplomatic posture as tough but deal‑oriented. In an interview highlighted by the Washington Examiner, Trump says negotiators are “very close” to a nuclear agreement, insisting his remaining “sticking point” is to ensure Iran can never obtain a bomb not just by developing it, but also by purchasing or acquiring one. He frames this as correcting the alleged weakness of previous U.S. presidents, who he claims allowed Tehran to “get away with murder” and now find Iran “virtually decapitated.”

That logic leads directly to his advice to Israel after Iran’s missile salvos. In another Examiner report, Trump is quoted telling aides he would call Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and say “not to respond,” arguing that “Israel had its strike and Iran had its strike. We don’t need another one” and warning that a wider clash could “blow up” a near‑final deal with Tehran.

Supporters can point to internal consistency: the same president who green‑lit an audacious strike now seeks to lock in leverage through a nuclear accord. Critics, however, will see a volatile cycle of provocation and restraint that leaves both Israel’s deterrence and regional stability contingent on Trump’s personal calculus.