Morning Joe - David Ignatius: Trump just can’t figure out a way to end the war in Iran

Episode Date: April 20, 2026

David Ignatius: Trump just can’t figure out a way to end the war in Iran To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Iran was the bully of the Middle East. They're not the bully anymore. With the help of everyone here today, this has been by far the most successful first year of any administration in the history of our country, acknowledged by everybody. To begin with, I ended eight wars, and it may be a little early to say this, but if we add Iran and Lebanon, that will be 10 wars ended and many, many millions of lives saved. Think of how many lives. we've said. Wow. You know, it's so early on Monday morning to sort through all of that. But I mean, he says it's a war that everybody supports a new poll shows. What older polls show that only about one out of three Americans think this war, this war is a war that we should be involved that only 33% of Americans support the war, 67% do not. Regarding, again, he has this running tally in his head

that nobody around him stops him on all the wars that he has stopped. Well, Mika, you know, he started quite a few wars too. I mean, it's... That's what I was counting. Kind of like when I'm watching the Red Sox and I

kick the iced tea, the sweet tea, all over the carpet. And, you know, I do it like five or six times. And I say, Mika, I have, do you know, I have, myself, I have cleaned up the carpet five, six times just over the past two weeks. You go, well, that's fine, Joe, but you've actually, okay, so maybe I spilled a tea and you're kind of enough to clean it up. But you get the idea. I'm just trying to make a point here. Yeah, yeah. But anyway, a lot there, a lot there to digest, Mika. Yes, that was President Trump on Friday, repeating his false claim that he has ended eight wars and suggesting he could soon

get credit for two more that he and his allies started. As for that war with Iran, we're going to bring you the latest on whether or not the strait is open, the potential for peace talks and who will be leading them? All amid concerns, the ceasefire could end this week without a deal. Plus, we will go through that new polling showing that the Iran war is very much. unpopular with Americans, as the president's approval rating continues to drop to historic lows. And we'll dig into a new piece from the Wall Street Journal detailing the president's private fears about the Iran war and the parallels to the 1979 hostage crisis. We'll bring in one of the reporters on that. With us, we have the co-host of our 9-m. Hour staff writer at the Atlantic, John and Lamere.

co-host of the rest is politics podcast, the BBC's Caddy Kay, columnist and associate editor at the Washington Post, David Ignatius, and decorated combat veteran and former commander of U.S. Army Europe. Retired Army Lieutenant General Mark Hurdling joins us. So, Joe, a great panel this morning on a lot of moving parts. And also, I think, some numbers on a downward trend in terms of the president's approval rating and how people feel about this war. Yeah. Well, it's been been pretty consistent. I've got to say two things I want to talk about really quickly, David Ignatius, just to set the table, then we'll get in everything.

I was at an event for one of my children this weekend. My children all like, if the guy, is six foot four sort of children, but children all the same. And I had somebody come to I thought it was the most fascinating thing. Because I haven't looked at the news today. He's the straight open or closed. They go, well, it was open yesterday. It's closed today. Watch this space tomorrow.

And it was sort of said tongue and cheek. And again, I live in a fairly conservative place. So chances are good that most of the people around me, but for Donald Trump. But a lot of eye rolling there, even as we stayed away from politics, there still is like the, come on, man, is a straight open, is a straight close? How much longer are we going to have to be paying $4 plus for gasoline?

So that was one side of it. And I know like you, like me, you're always fascinated when something that's happening in the news breaks through a big event for, in my case, for my kids. It was prom time. A big event like that where somebody is asking a question like that. So that was fascinating. Another thing, we're going to be talking to Andy Olensky, Wall Street Journal. reporter who, along with Josh Dawsey, wrote a remarkable sort of behind the scenes look at the president and how he's been responding during this war and being haunted by the Iranian

hostage crisis. And it just struck me that this president who, you know, I've had the ability to speak with over the past 20, 25 years, this president, you know, there, there seem to be two presidents that that he brought up the most. One with contempt, George W. Bush, for some reason, really,

just all in against George W. Bush, and mainly he'll bring up the Iraq war. He was stupid. He made the mistake after 9-11, and we didn't keep the oil. That's what he said. Then the second was Jimmy Carter, who,

you know, he liked enough as a man, but just thought he was so weak in the Iranian hostage crisis. And so here we have these two presidents that have sort of been fixed in Donald Trump's mind through the decades on the type of president he would not want to be, and him being talked into a conflict by Benjamin, the likes of Benjamin Netanyahu and Lindsey Graham, and finding himself where he's sort of this combination of both right now. So Joe, this is the war that Donald Trump just can't figure out a way to end.

It seems pretty obvious that he wants the exit ramp, that he felt that the time to settle this and get past the economic difficulties that were growing more obvious for the country, if financial markets had come. But he hasn't been able to do it yet. He's erratic in his course. He'll declare the straight open, and then he'll, he'll, It'll blockade it. He'll, as in this case over the weekend, fire on and seize an Iranian vessel that he thinks is trying to transit the strait.

And as you say, it's as if he's buffeted back and forth between a desire to be strong, as George W. Bush was in the first days of the Iraq war surge in, declare mission accomplished, but a fear of being weak, as Jimmy Carter was perceived, but by not being sufficiently tough. His negotiators are proceeding, as near as we can tell, toward a meeting that could begin tonight in Islamabad for a new version of a deal that, as I look at the elements, isn't all that different from the famous JCPOA, the agreement that President Obama's negotiators struck with Iran. in 2015.

So it's a very strange place for him to be. His behavior is so erratic. We may talk about some Wall Street Journal reporting in the last few days that goes into just how erratic people around him have found that behavior. But he is like presence before him, I think even of Richard Nixon. You may decide you want to stop a war,

but that's just the beginning of your problems. because the other guy has a vote. The adversary feels empowered, sensing that you want out, hardens the terms. There's obviously some dissension back home in Tehran, different people making different demands. The Iranians, Joe, just to say a final thing, clearly feel, as they look at this spectacle that we're discussing,

they feel they've won. They think that's the real lesson going on here. And when that perception gets in the mind of your adversary, you have a real problem convincing them to make reasonable compromises. So I think that's, I think people would like to see a negotiated settlement on reasonable terms. But just what Vice President Vance, Kushner and Whitkoff will encounter if they get to Islamabad tonight as is expected, hard to predict. Yeah, and you are so right. Iran since 1979 has been preparing. far, fearing that punch from the United States, time and again, they took that punch and they

feel like they've withstood it, at least politically. And of course, the reason, Mika, why seven presidents have not gone into Iran before, and the reason why I personally thought it was a mistake to go into Iran, despite the fact at some point they were going to have to be dealt with. There's just no doubt about it with the nuclear bomb. But he, but he's a, you know, Here we find ourselves even using that justification on the other side, and maybe where the president is like a third president that he's had very little nice to say about privately, and that is Barack Obama. And he may end up after all of this with a nuclear deal that looks a lot like Barack Obama's nuclear deal

that he had contempt for from the very beginning. Well, as David points out, I mean, the reality about Iran, and how they might respond and the way they are responding now, this was known. This was the reason why it was a big decision. Yeah. But let's pull all the moving parts together here. The fragile ceasefire between the United States and Iran set to expire this week

is under pressure this morning amid renewed threats, escalatory actions, and a continued standoff over the Strait of Hormuz. Over the past 72 hours, both warring parties have repeatedly accused each other of violating the tenuous truce. The latest back and forth began Friday morning when Iran announced the strait would reopen. President Trump, however, said the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports would remain in place until a deal is reached. Iran, in turn, said it would once again enforce restrictions over the waterway, and on Saturday it fired on two Indian flag ships trying to transit. President Trump described that action as a, quote, total violation of our ceasefire and reiterated his threat to knock out, quote, every single

power plant and bridge in Iran, potential war crimes targeting civilian sites if the country does not come to a deal. Then in the latest test of the truce, the president announced yesterday that the U.S. military attacked and seized an Iranian cargo ship. It said, was attempting to get past the American blockade of Iran's ports and coastline. Trump said a U.S. Navy-guided missile destroyer in the Gulf of Oman warned the ship to stop before, quote, blowing a hole in the engine room when it did not listen. Tehran is now warning. It will respond to and retaliate against what it calls a violation of the ceasefire

and an act of piracy. It is unclear if talks between the U.S. and Iran will happen today following the seizure of that Iranian flag ship by U.S. forces. A spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry has said that Iran has no plans for another round of negotiations with the U.S. However, the New York Times reports that Pakistan's capital has been put on a security lockdown. It's the same procedure taken when the city has hosted the previous rounds of talks. And Trump told MS now that envoy Steve Whitkoff and Jared Kushner would lead the U.S. delegation for the latest round of negotiations before two senior officials later said Vice President J.D. Fance would lead it. The White House did not explain the contradiction. So, Joe, here we are.

Right. It's not something Trump can control, and it feels like you can feel that frustration. Well, they're working. From base on my reporting yesterday, they are working on a deal. My information was David's information that Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were planning to fly to Islamabad and meet with the Iranians and start the negotiations again. But the question is, how do you negotiate with somebody who is in a much stronger position after most of the military targets have been hit than they were before politically. We don't know internally how powerful the regime is, but based on all the reporting we have, it is hardened, it is more

radicalized, it is more determined to prove that it can take a punch from the United States and keep going. General, though, I want to bring you in, and let's just talk about the military logistics of what would happen. Do you believe at this stage it is possible to open the straight again? Or is this something where we're just going to have to depend on our negotiators and the Iranian negotiators getting a deal? Is a deal the only way to get the straights open? Yeah, Joe, if I can, because I'm kind of a simple guy.

The answer to your question is, is it possible? Yes. Are the negotiators going to achieve something, potentially? But I'll put it more in simple terms. We study a lot about the outcomes of war and the development of power in war at the different war colleges and even in experiential means. What I'd say, I'll make it simple. Power in war is equal to will times resources. You know, and that sounds like two big categories. but when you talk about will, you're talking about the will of the individual who is leading the government, the will of those who support them in government, the will of the citizens that support the government, the will of the military force that you're using. When you're speaking of resources, it's literally all about not just the weaponry you have and the way you use them and the way you've been trained to use them, but also some of the other resources you have. I would suggest that one of the resources that Iran has is control over their territory,

not just their landmass, but also the routes in and out of Hormuz and also what they have in terms of their ports, the resources that they have in terms of those that we used to consider partners in the Middle East, who are now saying, hey, this war is affecting us, Oman, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Kuwait. I mean, name any of the Gulf states who are being affected by this because their economy is weakening and some of their land masses have been hit. And you're understanding how that resource capability expand. The United States Navy is a very good resource. Central Command is a very good resource, but they are limited right now in what they can do because you have several hundred merchant ships in the area that not all of them can be escorted or protected, as we saw over the

weekend when Iran took a couple of small boats and went after a merchant ship. You're showing films right now of the USS Spruance firing a five-inch gun at a merchant ship, and in and of itself, that seems like a fascinating action and the fact that they can hit, and that gun can hit targets at 20 miles. It's a very relatively small gun, five inches, with a long barrel that can be very accurate. But once you hit that wheelhouse, then what? What do you do? You put Marines on the ship, as President Trump has said, but what do they do with it now? And that's just one of hundreds of ships. So you can see how you become overwhelmed by resources that may not be a part of the Iranian government, but things that the U.S. has to protect now that they claim that they've

closed the straits and can control it. They don't. Iran does. So again, if you look at the will of the government, will of the soldiers, the will of the people who are pretending, we see a consolidation, a regime shift inside of Iran, where there's a consolidation of power between the IRGC and the normal diplomats. If we believe the diplomats that are in Pakistan are, or creating this deal with whoever the U.S. sends over, whether it's Whitkoff, Kushner, or Vance, you'd be wrong because right now it's consolidated under the IRGC. In fact, a guy named Ahmad Bahadhi, who's making the decisions. And that's something that hasn't happened in Iran. So we haven't considered the culture of this country and also the what-if drills that normally go

along with any time you try and bring strategy to bear against an enemy. General, let me I wanted to move on but I've got to circle back on two or three things and I'll try to get them to you briefly but have you respond

to where we are right now. First of all I go back to Thursday's testimony from the Secretary of Army Driscoll who said the Ukrainians have changed the nature of warfare the way man fights wars and talked about how extraordinary they are. And I've said this all along. If the White

House didn't have such contempt for the Ukrainians before they went into Iran, they would see how the Ukrainians have forever changed warfare and they would have thought twice about going into Iran. Actually, I have the bite. Let me play this really briefly for you. This is the secretary of the army. The United States Army has stood by and stood with the Ukrainians from the very first day of the war. I've been to Kiev. I've spent a lot of time with a lot of the Ukrainian leadership. They have fundamentally altered how humans engage in conflict. They have done an absolutely amazing job of innovating.

And I am publicly on record saying we are learning a lot from them and we are changing to a lot of the lessons that they have taught us. I suspect war colleges will teach what the Ukrainians have done. it is absolutely remarkable what the Ukrainians have done against the Russians over the past four years. Secondly, I just bring up very briefly a conversation I had with an Intel expert on Iran for the past 30, 40 years who said, what you're going to see next are boat swarms, as you talked about, drone swarms, drones launch from boats, non-launch. drones. And he just kept

using the word swarms. And it's going to neutralize any effort of this remarkable military success we've had fighting the last war. And finally, a quote from the Wall Street Journal's story we're going to have Andy Linsky on. And I'll

just read briefly, we are witnessing an astonishing military success that does not add up to victory and that is squarely on the president and how he's chosen to do his job. But that first line, we are witnessing astonishing military successes. Yes, we are.

But it seems fighting by the old rules. And it seems that those successes are unable to avoid what seven presidents before Donald Trump has feared. And that is an attack against Iran means the closure of the straight. Yeah. You know, Joe, if I can go back to your Ukraine example, you know my biases in Ukraine. Like Secretary Dhristel. I've spent time in Kiev, Kharkiv, Yavarev, across that country with the Ukrainian military. And it just proves my point about will versus resources.

Russia came in as the fourth largest army in the will. Ukraine has the higher will. So it was will against resources, and that shifted over the last four years. We're going to see the same thing, I think, in Iran. with the consolidation of the Iranian power. There will now, actually, Trump's ours, not to use a poor expression, but there's one person who's trying to will this into action, and that's the president. He has no support from the people, well, very little support from the people.

He has the military, the resources, but they are going to be facing some very desperate situations in terms of what you can accomplish with military force. it goes back to the argument, when you go into a conflict without an overarching strategy and an end state and the measures of resources and will that contribute to that with not only your nation but your allies, you're probably going to find yourself in rough position when the what-if drill start turning against you. And that's what we're starting to see right now. Well, and I will. That reminds me of a quote. You passed along to us at the very beginning of this war. You said, the slowest way to lose a war is with great tactics and bad strategy.

And here we are more than halfway through April. Retired Army Lieutenant General Mark Hurdling, thank you so much. Greatly appreciate it, as always. Yes, sir. Thank you. All right. Thank you so much. John Lemire, the president, a lot on his mind right now.

They still believe, let me just say we've talked about. A lot of daunting challenges there. I will say they still believe they can get a deal with the Iranians are still moving forward, believing that this morning. So I think for the sake of world peace, for the sake of working Americans, for the sake of those that are just getting battered at the gas pumps and also the rising prices across the board in America, let's hope that is possible. they are optimistic that they may be able to get a deal today. That said, the backdrop looking rather bleak right now at 623 on East Coast time on this Monday morning. Yeah, White House officials selling the same to me. They feel like a deal as possible, but those involved in negotiations, those close negotiations,

less optimistic today than they were 48 hours ago. Let's rewind just a little bit here. Friday when President Trump and Iran both announced that the straight-of-home was reopening, Trump went to Truth Social about a half dozen times, talking about how this is a new day, the strait is open, basically declaring the war is over. That was his tenor there. And then because the U.S. blockade remained in place, Iran said, well, actually, we're going to close the straight again. And then open fire on some vessels. Nothing's going through there. And I am told the president felt really humiliated by this. This is something he's going to have to deal with. There's a slap in the

face that Iran defied him here. And now suddenly, the status of the war, war remains very unknown. And so does, Katty, the status of these possible negotiations. We know U.S. delegation heading to Islamabad. It's not clear whether the Iranians are even going to show up. So reports this morning, the Iranian foreign ministry says, more or less, there's no point to even having conversations if the U.S. blockade remains. You know, they do bluster. They could send a negotiation, a delegation team anyway. But that's what they're saying right now. That said, there's some Pakistani officials putting out word, we'll see, could be spin, putting out word that they believe there will be talks because they think President Trump will

lift the blockade, which of course is Iran's condition. But this just adds to so much uncertainty on this conflict, which on Friday did seem like a major step had been taken to ending. Maybe that's still the case. But as Joe just said, it's far murkier now than it appeared. So here we are on Monday morning, and there's a huge amount of confusion as we head. hopefully to the end of this war, but that's also not in sight very clearly. We don't know exactly who's in control in Iran.

We don't know exactly who's going to be at the negotiation table. We don't know exactly if the negotiations are going to take place. We don't know if the Straits of Hormuz are open or not open or only sort of open. So it's very hard to see how the administration gets itself out of this. What we do know is that the JCPOA, which this deal seems to be based on to a large, degree took 20 months of direct negotiations between the Americans and the Iranians to complete. And that was after about 10 years of indirect negotiations. So trying to get some kind of a deal with the Iranians in the space of a week or two, I think is wildly unrealistic. Look how long it

took us to do last time around. We're in a position where an awful lot is happening, but not as changing. I just took a week of vacation traveling out west, camping out west with my husband. and I was getting these drips of news coming in, and it all seemed very dramatic, but I come back a week later, and we're sort of at the status quo. Not much has actually has changed very much. All right.

Still ahead on Morning, Joe. As we mentioned, we'll bring in one of the reporters behind that story about President Trump's biggest fears when it comes to the war in Iran. Plus, we'll get into the administration's surprising reversal on Russian oil sanctions, something the Treasury

secretary had vowed wasn't going to happen just two days prior. And as we go to break, a quick look at the Travelers' Forecast this morning from Accuethers Bernie Rayno. Bernie has it looking. Well, Mika, last week, it felt like July in the Northeast. Now we're going back to March the next couple of days. A couple of showers here this morning. New York City, Philadelphia, Harrisburg, this afternoon, Boston, Portland, 50s, 40s, how about 39 degrees in Buffalo? Southeast, the drought worsened, just sunshine and warm. Watch for thunderstorms from Houston towards San Antonio and Austin, where there can be some flight delays,

but along East Coast, other than Miami, with a few spotty thunderstorms, it's a quiet travel day. To help you make the best decisions and be more in the know, download the Acky Weather app today. Welcome back. 32 past the hour, live look at D.C., a lot going on this Monday morning new polling, showing President Trump's approval rating is sinking as Americans.

express growing concern about the war in Iran. The latest NBC News poll has Trump's approval at 37%, the lowest of his second term, while 63% disapprove. The poll finds two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of the war with Iran, including 54% who strongly disapprove. This all comes, as voters say the economy remains atop concern. According to the poll, 29% say it's the issue. that matters the most of them right now,

while 24% say threats to democracy and 12% at health care and 10% at crime and safety. So, Joe, I think one of the problems here is the shifting reasons. I don't think people are understanding why we're even doing this with Iran. The reasons have changed over time.

Gas prices have gone up. There hasn't been a real national... getting behind this that has been set up by this administration, sort of came by surprise. That's one of the great challenges, really, that the president and the White House is facing around. Could we put up, though, T.J., could we put up the issues that matter the most to Americans?

Because this is so telling where we are a year and a half after the 24 election. The bottom three, immigration, crime and safety, and foreign policy. Foreign policy, just because people don't care about foreign policy, even if it's critically important, they just don't care about foreign policy

unless things go badly. And they're a lot more concerned about, again, the kitchen table issues, crime and safety. There's been a historic decline, yes, even during the Biden administration, but a historic decline over the past three years or so. a drop in crime across America, if you look at the overall rates. Mom Donnie had the safest January in New York City on record.

That's being, you can say the same in cities across the country. In most places, crimes falling. And finally, immigration, two things have happened. The southern border secured. So, you know, that's one of the reasons people aren't so focused on that, but also the enforcement of immigration is so brutal, has been so brutish, has been so inhumane, has left Americans dead in the streets, that that has also dropped, just not as important. David, I want to go to you, though.

You know, I guess it's just, and I guess it's because of the era I grew up in, but I always, before war start, I go back to Cap Weinberger and later Colin Powell on the Weinberger doctrine, the Weinberger Powell doctrine, which actually, you know, we always say it's post-Vietnam, but actually Cap Weinberger, then Reagan Seckdef, drew those up following the Marine Barracks bombing in Lebanon. And I just want to read these off to you. I will offer no opinions for once. But as lawyers say, Ray Zipsa Loquiter, the facts speak for themselves. Here are the six things that Weinberger and Powell said had to be present before a war commenced. One, is a vital national security interest threatened?

Two, do we have a clear attainable objective? Three, have the risks and the costs? been fully and frankly analyzed. Four, have all other nonviolent policy means been fully exhausted? Five, is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement? The president is learning no on that as well. Six, have the consequences of our actions been fully considered. Number seven is the action.

supported by the American people, I was prompted to look this up because only one out of three American support this, two out of three opposed it. And number eight, do we have genuine, broad international support? And you know, David, a lot of people decided to throw that to the side after 9-11. And because of it, we got the Iraq War. We got a nasty, messy ending in Afghanistan after 20 years there. And we find ourselves in Iran in another war where at best,

one of eight conditions may have been checked. But the others, we just blew through every stop sign, every lesson learned from Vietnam and Beirut. So, Joe, that list

of obligations for an American president who wants to take the country into war should be written on a piece of paper and put in the resolute desk for every next president to read. What we've seen in Iran is that the president has an absolute obligation to explain the war and its goals to the country, to generate a level of public support that will sustain that, not just in terms of the loss of American life, but in the sacrifice. that we're asking of others who were, in theory, going to fight with us.

And that's the reason that our founders insisted that Congress, through Article 1, needed to have the power to declare war. It's not just because you want to bring Congress involved, it's because you want the people represented by Congress to understand what the war is about and support it. And so I've come to think that this requirement. for congressional war powers isn't so much a battle between the two branches. It's about the conditions for being able to sustain wars once we start them.

But the list that you read and the absence of those features, I think, explains a lot about President Trump's dilemma right now. He's leading a war that's sharply unpopular. Two-thirds of the country either strongly disapproves or somewhat disapproves. of what he's trying to do. Those are not the conditions in which an American president can successfully lead the war. And so his option really is to try to negotiate a way out. And the Iranians see that. They see that he needs out more than they do. And for Iran, you don't have to win this war. You just have to survive. And that's what they're doing. And that's why they have leverage right now.

The Washington Post, David Ignatius. Thank you very much. We appreciate it. And coming up on Morning Joe, behind Trump's public bravado on the war, he grapples with his own fears about it. That's the title of the Wall Street Journal piece we've been discussing. And we'll bring in the co-author of that revealing piece. White House reporter for the Wall Street Journal, Annie Lindsky. We'll be right back. Welcome back. The Wall Street Journal is at with new reporting from behind the scenes at the White House entitled,

Despite his public bravado, President Trump is grappling with his own fears regarding a Iran. According to the journal, the operation to extract two airmen whose jet was shot down over Iran this month was followed by hours of the president screaming at AIDS, quote, images of the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis. One of the biggest international policy failures of a presidency in recent times had been looming large in his mind. The paper reports the president is dealing with his own fear about ordering troops into harm's way. Trump has resisted sending American soldiers to take Karg Island, for example, the launch point for 90% of Iran's oil exports. While he was told the mission would succeed and the territories capture would give the U.S. access to the strait,

he worried there would be unacceptably high American casualties. Still, he has made risky pronouncements without input from his national security team, including his post about plans to destroy the Iranian civilization, saying seeming unstable could help spur the Iranians to negotiate. A president who thrives on drama is bringing an even more intense version of his unorthodox maximalist approach to a new situation, fighting a war. He is veering between between belligerent and conciliatory approaches and grappling behind the scenes with just how badly things could go wrong. Joining us now, the co-author of that piece,

White House reporter for the Wall Street Journal, Annie Lindski. So, Annie, what else are you hearing about the president's feelings about this behind the scenes? It seems to match pretty well or track pretty well with the way Iran is responding, which anybody with a sense of how things go with Iran is not surprised about. Yeah, Micah, my colleague Josh Dossi and I set out to try to draw a portrait of the president at war. Donald Trump has had two presidencies, but he has never overseen a sustained military campaign like this.

And while we, you know, as Americans have seen his very unique governing style in other aspects of his presidency, legislating executive orders and the like, we've never witnessed this type of sort of impulsive and his sort of desire to appear chaotic during wartime. So that was what we were trying to show and the reporting target that we had for this piece. Annie, one of the things I thought was really fascinating about your piece was how there seemed to be two parallel tracks happening that are not necessarily communicating with each other all the time in the White House. So you've got during the operation to try and rescue the airmen, you've got the security people keeping Donald Trump away from the situation because they thought he might make it more complicated. But then at the same time, you've also got the president on his own track launching truth socials about ending a civilization from. example, or praise be to Allah on Easter morning, without negotiation and clearing those posts and going through the post with his national security team. So how much, I mean, how much is it

the president just launching things and how much is it the national security team actually running the operation in the White House? Yeah, those tweets, or I should say those true social posts that took so many people off guard who woke up and read them about ending a civilization saying, praise be to Allah on Easter Sunday of all days. Those were not tweets that he had even sort of chatted with his national security team about. They read them much the way we did after they were posted. The president did ask his staff about those tweets and said, how are they playing? What am I being criticized? And his staff said, yes, sure, you are. You're facing quite a bit of criticism for them. Some of his members of his national security team read them and saw,

you know, weren't as alarmed by them as many others were. They said, look, they felt that he was communicating the way the Iranians do. The Iranians have for years said, you know, death to America and believe perhaps this would get through to them in a way that the more restrained language that we're used to from a president perhaps has not. But you're right, that wasn't something that was being, you know,

workshopped within the White House is to that there was a long call that was open when the two airmen were down in behind enemy lines. And that is an instance where the staff were updating the president frequently, but they didn't want him to be, on that line that they were concerned that he was so impatient as he was watching those developments,

but they didn't have him doing the minute-to-minute call. But to be sure, he was being updated regularly in that weekend when those army were down. Jonathan, off of what Andy just said about the president doing this, to speak in a way the Iranians understood. I have I have heard from Arab leaders in the region several over the past year that they actually, I'm just reporting, they actually like the fact, as one told me after these posts, that the molas now have to deal with someone who is, quote, crazier than they are. Other diplomats across the region have said, he actually thinks like an Arab leader.

He doesn't think like an American leader. Donald Trump thinks and talks like the sort of leaders that we grew up with. And if that throws the Iranians off, you Americans may not understand this, but we're totally fine with it, which I found to be fascinating. Yes, I do have a problem with it. I have a problem with all of it. That said, even this past week, I heard again, as I've been hearing for a year, he's the only American president that can strike fear in the hearts of Iranians. Well, I would say, and also in the hearts of everybody that lives in Washington and across America. Yeah, no question there. White House AIDS, as Annie reported, anxious at the time, a lot of them since that post has said, well, it worked.

Look, you know, that got Iran to agree to the ceasefire. Like, these sets up the table for negotiations. like sort of defending it in retrospect, the madman theory, if you will, that you just outlined, Joe, that it's impossible to predict Trump, so therefore you have to fear the worst. And that's all this was, art of the deal, that stuff. We'll see.

But, Annie, the other thing that your story illustrates well is, though Trump, this time, second term, far more likely to authorize military force than in the first. But he's still hesitant to cross a threshold of deploying ground troops. He's still very nervous about American lives lost in themselves would be terrible, but also the political ramifications of that.

So speak to us about that still, that hesitation, and what we could learn from it as we consider what could come next, because the fate of these negotiations still very much in doubt, Trump may need to escalate further and actually to get this war to close if it can't be down the negotiating table in Islamabad the next couple of days. Yeah, you know, I was really struck in talking to some of the people around the president and his advisors and some of his informal advisors, the extent to which he has brought up in conversations, Jimmy Carter and how Jimmy Carter's experience in Iran,

this exact regime that President Trump has been bombing. But how Jimmy Carter's experience in Iran has loomed large as he's been weighing what to do. And he has even spoken, the president has spoken publicly about this in a March event in Florida, he brought up Jimmy Carter as he was talking about Democrat. He was ticking off Democratic failures in foreign policy, but he dwelt at length about Jimmy Carter, something that his friends have said and people who have spoken to him have said he has talked about privately as well. So his hesitance on putting troops on the ground is real.

He's very concerned about how that would be. He has not been in a position before of sending troops in harm's way, in this way. You know, that is not to say he won't do it. And his advisors have been very clear with us that remains in a table. It's not something that they're going to take off. But he has said, you know, troops going to Kirk Island, would they be sitting ducks? Would they all be killed? And that is a very real fear that he has articulated.

And for good reason. And Annie, I couldn't help. But notice the picture that accompanied your story, at least when I read it online, had so many parallels with the failed 1980, Operation Eagle Claw, the failed operation to rescue the Iranian hostages back in 1980. obviously that parallel haunts the president, doesn't it? It really does. It's something that we have heard he talks about extensively.

And this is a time in his life when he was coming of age. He paid close attention to the news, as we know. But it's, you know, he would be one of, he has one of seven presidents to be bedeviled by this national security threat that Iran has faced. and he has thought about how other presidents have attempted to handle it and failed. So it is on his mind. All right, White House reporter for the Wall Street Journal, Annie Lindschild. Thank you very much for your reporting.

The new reporting is available to read online right now.