Less than an hour ago, Donald Trump published a new post on Truth Social: “THE CEASEFIRE IS NOW IN EFFECT,” he wrote. “PLEASE DO NOT VIOLATE IT! DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!”
If he has now gone to bed, that marks the end of a confusing night of posts from the US president, with mixed responses coming from Iran and Israel. But while Trump’s habit of making unilateral announcements on social media can be confusing, his declaration does appear to have held up so far, with neither side attacking the other in the meantime.
Here’s what else you need to know about a confusing night, and how we got here.
What did Trump announce – and why?
Trump’s announcement, and numerous later posts also on Truth Social, vibrate with his longing for a Nobel peace prize. (It’s not subtle: his initial message included a reflection that “This is a War that could have gone on for years, and destroyed the entire Middle East, but it didn’t, and never will!” Another featured a meme of him kissing the American flag with the text “Trump was right about everything”.)
By Trump’s account, Israel and Iran each approached him asking for a peace deal. Reuters reported that he had held personal talks with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while JD Vance held parallel talks with Tehran, with Qatar acting as a mediator to secure Iran’s agreement.
The plan Trump laid out was due to begin with an Iranian ceasefire six hours later, “when Israel and Iran have wound down and completed their in progress, final missions”. Then, 12 hours later, Israel would also end hostilities, and after a full day, there would be “an Official END to THE 12 DAY WAR”.
Even if Trump’s announcement was unconventional – and, according to the New York Times, took senior White House officials by surprise – there had been signs that something was shifting. Iran’s carefully calibrated response appeared designed to avoid triggering a further US attack – more on that below. And Benjamin Netanyahu had already indicated that Israel’s operation may soon draw to a close, saying that the country is “very, very close” to achieving its war aims.
What happened next?
There were reports that Israel’s attacks on Tehran intensified, which is not an unusual development in the last hours before a ceasefire as militaries seek to maximise their advantage. At 4.16am Iran Standard Time, the Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said that there was no agreement “as of now” but that “provided that the Israeli regime stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4am Tehran time, we have no intention to continue our response afterwards”.
Twenty minutes later, Araghchi said: “The military operations of our powerful Armed Forces to punish Israel for its aggression continued until the very last minute, at 4am.” Iranian state television later announced that an overall ceasefire had begun. But an Iranian missile barrage struck Israel after Trump’s deadline for them to end operations had passed.
In Israel, meanwhile, there was no acknowledgement of Trump’s announcement. There were no new Israeli strikes on Iran reported after 4am – but a few minutes ago Israel said that it had destroyed missile launchers “in recent hours in western Iran”.
How did Iran’s attack on the US shape what followed?
In yesterday’s newsletter, the Iran expert Mohammad Ali Shabani suggested that Iran would probably feel some kind of kinetic response was required “to show a domestic audience that they are not defeated”, but noted that there might be a desire for a “bloodless” attack to avoid triggering a further US reaction.
That appears to be what happened later in the day. So carefully did Iran measure its response to symbolically fit the American strikes that a statement by the Supreme national security council noted that the “number of missiles used were the same number as bombs the US had used on three Iranian nuclear sites”.
If the claim was parity, the truth was that this was a materially inconsequential attack. It was aimed at the forward headquarters of the US military’s Central Command, Al Udeid airbase, which is about 30km south-west of the Qatari capital of Doha. About 10,000 troops are based there. As well as giving warning of an imminent attack, Iran said that it was targeted because it was away from population centres.
In advance of the US attack on Iranian nuclear facilities on Sunday, satellite images showed that fighter jets, drones and transport planes that are ordinarily on the tarmac at Al Udeid had gone, with 40 aircraft down to just three by Thursday. A Qatari official said that the base had been evacuated on Monday before the attack took place. Qatar also said that it had successfully intercepted all but one of 19 missiles fired before they reached the base. Airspace over the country was closed but swiftly reopened.
Earlier reports that a missile had also been launched at a US base in Iraq – including a reference in a statement from Iran’s official press agency – turned out to be a false alarm.
Qatar responded angrily, but also called for “a serious return to the negotiating table”. Other countries in the region were also critical of Tehran. But most significantly, Donald Trump interpreted it as a ritualistic step which did not require a further American response – and suggested that he would now press Israel to de-escalate.
It came after a day of heavy activity on which it struck Tehran’s notorious Evin prison, calling it an “agency of government repression”, and a paramilitary headquarters. It also followed the US strike on the Fordow nuclear facility by blowing up roads leading to the site.
Is Trump’s victory lap justified?
By one measure, and if the ceasefire holds, it is reasonable to see Trump’s gamble in attacking Iran’s nuclear sites as having paid off. While Iran found a way to declare victory, its military capacity has been significantly degraded by Israeli attacks over the last 12 days. The calculation that it would feel too weak to open a major confrontation with the US over a significant assault setting back its nuclear capabilities by years appears to have been the right one.
He can also reasonably say that he has brokered an end to the conflict, though it appears likely that Israel would have reached a similar view about the diminishing value of further conflict – and with its own interceptor missiles running low – in any case.
But by another analysis, the long-term consequences of the US attack on Iran are much less clear. Many analysts suggest that Iran will ultimately be able to reconstruct its nuclear programme, and that it is likely to seek to do so in secret; meanwhile, Iranian public support for having a nuclear weapon appears to have risen.
Before the attacks, Iran had an estimated stockpile of 408kg of uranium enriched to 60% purity – approaching the grade required for nuclear weapons. Trucks and security convoys were seen at the Fordow nuclear facility in the days before the US strikes, and after Trump telegraphed their likelihood; Israeli officials have assessed that the uranium is likely to have been moved away. Its whereabouts is currently unknown.
