Analysis: Trump's decision to use force against Iran exposes the limitations of a "compliant cabinet"

Trump's decision to go to war on Iran was influenced in part by pressure from external allies, while his own White House team was relatively restrained, highlighting that in his second term, the original restraint mechanism has been replaced by a "pass signal". According to people familiar with the matter, those privately urging Trump to take action against Iran include Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, and some conservative commentators. The News Corporation founder communicated with Trump repeatedly, urging him to take action against Tehran. At the same time, some of Trump's closest advisers, including Vice President Vance, Secretary of State Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wells, have been more restrained about the prospect of launching an armed conflict, people familiar with the matter said. Few, if any, told him face to face that it was an ill-thought-out decision. People familiar with the matter said Wells had tried to ensure that the president was fully aware of the options, while Vance urged senior officials to be honest with the president and discuss the possibility of war. At a closed-door meeting before the attack, Vance also asked how it would unfold in the event of war. The launch of the war marked one of the most significant decisions of Trump's second term. The decision pushed his administration to the brink of a domestic and foreign crisis, shook U.S. allies, pushed up energy costs and further complicated the Republican Party's prospects in the midterm elections. Despite these factors, Trump remained firm and said it was up to him to decide when to end the war. It shows how much power the president has in following his instincts, and how he has encountered little opposition in his team, even as he has given up on key campaign promises such as ending wars overseas.