Trump Weighs Renewed Iran Strikes After Midterm Elections

Eight months after President Trump launched military strikes on Iran, Pentagon officials are discussing a new multi-day bombing campaign that could begin once the Nov. 3 U.S. midterm elections are decided, according to a same-day Guardian opinion column by Mohamad Bazzi. The plans under discussion would again target Iran's underground nuclear facilities, missile arsenals and civilian infrastructure, Bazzi writes — the same categories of sites hit when the war began roughly eight months earlier.

Officials have been leaking details of the proposed strikes "for weeks," according to the column, keeping the question of a resumed war hanging over the final stretch of the midterm campaign.

What is the Pentagon reportedly planning?

One rationale circulating inside the Pentagon, per Bazzi, is that an "intensive" multi-day attack would force Iran to make new concessions in nuclear talks that have stalled since the original strikes. The targets described — underground nuclear sites, missile stockpiles and civilian infrastructure — mirror the opening phase of the conflict Trump started eight months ago, the column notes.

Why did Trump hold off before Nov. 3?

Bazzi writes that Trump was reluctant to restart the war before the midterms because Republicans already face voter anger over rising energy prices and other costs, and a new bombing campaign risked compounding losses for the party at the polls. Once the country gets past Tuesday's vote, the column argues, that political constraint loosens — even if it does not disappear, since Trump would still answer to voters again in future elections.

What is Netanyahu pushing for?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spent months persuading Trump to join Israel in a war aimed at toppling Iran's government in Tehran, according to Bazzi. The column reports that Netanyahu called Trump on Saturday and urged him to restart bombing soon after the midterms, a renewal of the pressure campaign that preceded the original strikes eight months ago.

Would new strikes bring a deal closer?

Bazzi argues no. The Pentagon's current rationale — that an intensive multi-day attack would extract fresh concessions — repeats "the same folly that dragged the US into a senseless war in the first place," the column states, when Trump was reportedly convinced Iran's leadership would fall within days of a surprise strike that killed its top officials. The column adds that Trump "shows little sign that he has learned from the mistakes that led him into this quagmire," particularly after he had repeatedly promised supporters he would not start new Middle East wars.

By the numbers

• 8 months — length of the conflict Trump launched against Iran, as of the Nov. 3 Guardian column's publication.
• Nov. 3, 2026 — U.S. midterm election day, the point at which officials reportedly believed Trump would feel freer to act on renewed strikes.

Those two figures frame the political calendar Bazzi describes: a war already eight months old, paused at the edge of an election that could determine how much domestic cover the administration has to resume it.

What happens to US-Iran talks next?

The column does not report a new strike date or confirm Pentagon sign-off; it describes leaked plans and Netanyahu's renewed lobbying as of Saturday's call. Whether Trump acts on the proposal once midterm results are final remains, per Bazzi's framing, an open question tied to how much political risk the president is willing to absorb after voters have already registered their views on energy costs and the broader economy.

Glossary

Stalled negotiations — The nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran that, per Bazzi's column, have produced no agreement since the war began roughly eight months ago.

Multi-day attack — The Pentagon's described approach for a renewed campaign: an extended, rather than single-strike, bombing operation intended to pressure Iran into new concessions, according to the column.

Readers can review the full column, including Bazzi's account of the original strike rationale and Netanyahu's role in pushing for the war, at The Guardian.