Trump opposed Netanyahu's plans for renewed strikes on Iran ahead of US midterms - report

Israel’s military prepared to resume strikes against Iran during the weekend of October 10. The planned action was a multi-day operation aimed at several kinds of targets. It mattered because it could have reopened direct fighting between Israel and Iran on a larger scale.

The IDF reportedly prepared targets that included civilian infrastructure, nuclear facilities, and regime targets. Three people familiar with the plans told the Financial Times that the operation would have been larger than February’s Operation Roaring Lion. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had also instructed the military to plan a new offensive.

The operation was canceled after US President Donald Trump objected. The report said Trump did not want to reignite a regional military conflict before the November 3 US midterm elections. The article adds that Netanyahu is still campaigning for large-scale strikes, so renewed action remains possible if there is no deal.

The decision involved political leaders, military planners, and defense officials on both sides. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was campaigning to resume large-scale strikes and had ordered the IDF to prepare a new offensive. US President Donald Trump opposed the planned operation because of its timing before the US midterm elections.

The Israeli military developed the target list and operational plan. Defense Minister Israel Katz reportedly attended Netanyahu’s later meeting with US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at Ovda air base. IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir and other senior Israeli officials were not invited, reportedly to protect confidentiality.

The meeting’s main topic was reportedly Iran, but the article does not establish that it produced a final decision. US involvement also remained unclear. Sources said direct American participation was possible, while the reported choice to cancel the operation followed Trump’s opposition. Netanyahu continued pressing for renewed strikes afterward.

Israel reportedly prepared a broad target set rather than focusing on one type of facility. The Financial Times reported that the IDF had identified civilian infrastructure, nuclear facilities, and regime targets. This matters because the categories cover both military or strategic capabilities and the wider systems supporting Iran’s state.

The article gives no detailed list of individual sites. It does, however, identify three target categories through people familiar with the planning. Civilian infrastructure could include major public systems, while nuclear facilities would relate to Iran’s nuclear program. Regime targets would focus on institutions or assets associated with the ruling leadership.

The planned operation was canceled after Trump objected to restarting a regional conflict before the November 3 US midterm elections. Netanyahu later continued campaigning for large-scale strikes. The article therefore describes the targets as prepared plans, not confirmed attacks, and does not say that any of these targets were struck.

The key comparison is scale. Three people familiar with the matter told the Financial Times that Israel’s planned multi-day operation against Iran would have been larger than February’s Operation Roaring Lion. This suggests a broader or more intense campaign, but the article does not quantify the difference.

The plan reportedly included civilian infrastructure, nuclear facilities, and regime targets. Those categories indicate a wide target set. The IDF was preparing for an operation against the Iranian regime, rather than a narrowly defined strike on one facility. The article also says the operation was planned for the weekend of October 10.

No exact number of aircraft, missiles, targets, days, or casualties is provided. Therefore, the safest conclusion is only that the proposed operation exceeded the February operation in intended scale. It was canceled after Trump opposed reigniting regional conflict before the November 3 US midterm elections, though Netanyahu continued seeking a new offensive.

US midterm elections are nationwide elections held about halfway through a president’s four-year term. Voters choose members of Congress, and many states also hold elections for governors and other offices. The article identifies November 3 as the relevant election date, though it does not explain the election system in detail.

Timing mattered because Trump reportedly opposed Israel’s planned operation shortly before those elections. The Financial Times reported that he did not want to reignite a military conflict in the region ahead of the vote. The concern was therefore political and strategic timing, not a reported rejection of every possible action against Iran.

The operation was canceled after Trump’s opposition, but the issue remained active. Netanyahu continued campaigning to resume large-scale strikes, and the article described a later covert meeting with Hegseth as focused mainly on Iran. The article also says joint US-Israeli strikes remained a possible scenario in the coming weeks.

A joint US-Israeli operation would mean that the canceled confrontation could resume with both countries potentially taking part. That matters because the article describes the planned Israeli campaign as larger than February’s Operation Roaring Lion and aimed at several target categories. A renewed operation could therefore make the conflict more extensive.

The reported mechanism is coordinated military action. Israel had prepared targets involving civilian infrastructure, nuclear facilities, and regime targets. US participation was not confirmed, but sources told the Financial Times that it was not unreasonable to expect the two nations to restart strikes together. The later Netanyahu-Hegseth meeting reportedly focused on Iran.

The article does not confirm that joint strikes would occur or describe their exact consequences. It says Trump had opposed reigniting conflict before the November 3 elections, while Netanyahu continued pushing for renewed action. Sources summarized the uncertainty with two possibilities: “There will either be a deal or an attack.”

Nuclear facilities often matter in conflicts because attacks on them can affect a state’s ability to develop, maintain, or protect nuclear capabilities. They can also carry major strategic and political importance. The article identifies nuclear facilities as one of the target categories Israel reportedly prepared in its planned operation against Iran.

The reported target list also included civilian infrastructure and regime targets. This shows that the proposed campaign was not limited to one type of military site. The article provides no names of facilities, technical details, or evidence about the condition of Iran’s nuclear program. It only states that nuclear facilities were included in planning.

The operation was canceled after Trump opposed reigniting a regional conflict ahead of the November 3 US midterm elections. Netanyahu later continued campaigning for renewed strikes, and his meeting with Hegseth reportedly centered on Iran. Thus, the article presents nuclear facilities as strategically important targets, but does not confirm that they were attacked.