From airstrikes to no ground troops: What options the Trump administration is weighing on Iran | Explained

From airstrikes to no ground troops: What options the Trump administration is weighing on Iran | Explained

• Trump administration drafts plans for airstrikes on Iranian military targets
• Protests in Iran escalate; US warns of action if crackdown intensifies
• No final decision made; US aims to avoid unifying Iranian public against it

Did our AI summary help?

The Donald Trump administration has begun drawing up preliminary contingency plans for potential large-scale airstrikes against Iranian military targets, US officials said on Saturday, as nationwide unrest in Iran entered its third week and signs of a harsher crackdown emerged.

The discussions mark a sharp escalation in Washington’s posture toward Tehran. President Trump has issued a series of warnings on Truth Social, declaring the United States is “locked and loaded” and “ready to help” if Iranian authorities continue using lethal force against protesters.

Protests erupted in late December after Iran’s currency collapse and soaring inflation, but have since evolved into mass demonstrations demanding an end to clerical rule. International watchdogs say a nationwide internet blackout lasting more than 48 hours is likely aimed at concealing a decisive security operation. Human rights groups estimate at least 65 deaths so far, while unverified reports from medical sources in Tehran suggest fatalities may have crossed 200.

What are the options? 

Within the White House, officials have framed possible military action as limited, high-impact strikes rather than ground operations. Proposed targets reportedly include Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) command centres and air defence installations. The approach follows the precedent of June 2025, when the US used bunker-buster bombs against Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

Trump has warned that further killings of “peaceful protesters” would cross a final “red line”, triggering an American response aimed at “rescuing” the Iranian people. Tehran has responded defiantly, with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei accusing the US of having hands “stained with the blood of Iranians”. Iran’s Attorney General has warned that demonstrators would be treated as an “enemy of God”, a charge that carries the death penalty.

Despite the rhetoric, US officials stressed that no final decision has been taken and no military assets have yet been repositioned. Senior officials cautioned that any strikes must avoid unifying public opinion behind the Iranian regime or provoking retaliatory attacks against US personnel in the region.

Persian-language outlets based abroad, including BBC Persian and Radio Farda, have aired videos showing massive crowds in Tehran, Mashhad, and Yazd chanting against the Islamic Republic and praising Iran’s former monarchy. Some footage from Tehran showed buildings set ablaze.

Senior US officials said military options presented to Trump focus on elements of Iran’s security forces involved in suppressing protests. A senior military official noted that commanders would seek additional time to consolidate regional defences ahead of any potential Iranian retaliation.

Trump is weighing action against Iran barely six months after ordering strikes on three nuclear sites under an operation dubbed Midnight Hammer. That assault involved B-2 bombers dropping bunker-buster bombs on Fordow and Natanz, while US submarines fired cruise missiles at Natanz and Isfahan. Iran later responded with missile barrages and renewed offers for nuclear negotiations.

Last month, Trump met Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Mar-a-Lago, where the two discussed Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programmes. Trump later said he would support Israeli strikes if Tehran continued expanding those capabilities.

Since returning to office, Trump has authorised US military strikes in multiple theatres, including Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and Nigeria. During his first term, he also ordered the 2020 drone strike in Baghdad that killed Quds Force commander Qassim Suleimani.

While officials insist diplomacy has not been abandoned, the administration’s shift toward active contingency planning signals the end of what it once called “strategic patience”, replacing it with a doctrine that directly links internal repression to potential US military action.