July 30: Iraq’s Bloodless Coup That Was Followed by Rivers of Blood

Former Iraqi President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr and his deputy Saddam Hussein. (AFP)
Former Iraqi President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr and his deputy Saddam Hussein. (AFP)
TT

July 30: Iraq’s Bloodless Coup That Was Followed by Rivers of Blood

Former Iraqi President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr and his deputy Saddam Hussein. (AFP)
Former Iraqi President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr and his deputy Saddam Hussein. (AFP)

It’s unwise to corner Saddam Hussein and force him to accept a partner in governing Iraq. The Baath Party and Saddam himself don't favor partnerships.

The Baath Party, which regained power on July 17, 1968, has a history of significant and costly turning points.

The first major shift came on July 30 that year, enabling the party to consolidate power under President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, with Saddam as his deputy.

As a journalist, I spoke with some key figures from that time and felt it was important to share their stories with the readers of Asharq Al-Awsat.

The defeat of Arab armies in the 1967 war enraged the Arab public, who blamed their governments for what was termed a “setback” but was really a disaster.

Iraqi President Abdul Rahman Arif, who had succeeded his brother Abdul Salam, appeared weak, with a loose grip on the military and little popular support.

By the spring of 1968, rumors were spreading in closed circles about various factions plotting to seize power. Some expected the country to fall under military control.

The Baath Party leadership was keeping a close watch, fearing a coup. They began planning a return to power, seeking to avenge the 1963 events that led to bloodshed and the ousting of Abdul Salam Arif, whom they had initially helped bring to power.

Salah Omar al-Ali.

The leadership wanted to avoid a violent takeover and carefully considered their strategy.

A key figure was Col. Ibrahim al-Daoud, commander of the 20,000-strong Republican Guard. If al-Daoud resisted, a bloody battle could ensue at the palace gates. There was also the risk that such a conflict might pave the way for a third faction from the military to step in as a savior.

The Baathists decided to approach al-Daoud, hoping to win him over or at least neutralize him. They noted that al-Daoud was heavily influenced by his friend Abdul Razzaq al-Nayef, the deputy director of military intelligence, known for his strong influence and rumored ties to Western intelligence. Al-Daoud was thought to follow al-Nayef’s lead closely.

The complex task required cunning and was entrusted to al-Bakr, known for his military skills and political savvy.

The coup organizers secured the cooperation of officer Saadoun Ghaidan, who commanded a force stationed at the presidential palace, including several tanks.

Al-Bakr met with al-Daoud to reveal the plan to overthrow Arif. He urged him to keep the matter secret, swearing on the Quran that it would not be shared with anyone else, especially al-Nayef. However, al-Daoud quickly informed al-Nayef on July 15.

This leak put the Baath Party leadership in a tough spot. The secret was out, and al-Nayef, a man considered dangerous and rumored to have suspicious ties with Western intelligence, knew their plans. The success or failure of the coup now depended on his actions.

Salah Omar al-Ali, a key figure in the leadership, explained: “On the morning of July 16, we informed the civilian and military groups involved about the final details of their roles.”

“We initially planned to act on July 14, the anniversary of the 1958 revolution that established the republic, but practical issues delayed us.”

“On July 16, we retrieved hidden weapons and military uniforms for disguise. At 8 p.m., we met at al-Bakr’s house in the Ali al-Salih neighborhood on 14 Ramadan Street to finalize our plans, waiting for the operation at 2:30 a.m. Then, the unexpected happened.”

An armored vehicle is seen in front of the presidential palace after the 1968 coup. (Getty Images)

Shocking message

As the Baath Party’s regional leaders were finalizing their plans, there was a knock at the door. Al-Bakr answered and came back with a small note. He announced that it was from al-Nayef. The message read: “I know about your operation. I support you and am ready to help in any way. Trust in God.”

Al-Ali recalled that al-Bakr presented the message to the group, saying: “We need to discuss this and make a decision.”

The note, delivered by a lieutenant serving as al-Nayef’s aide, was shocking.

Although the messenger was a Baathist, his actions didn’t lessen the severity of the situation.

The group grew anxious and confused. Al-Nayef was known to be strong, very intelligent and ambitious, which made him a formidable figure. They considered the risks: if they canceled the operation, al-Nayef might reveal their plans, seeing it as a slight against him.

Canceling could be disastrous for the party, but involving al-Nayef was risky too. It was clear that al-Daoud had not kept his oath, complicating matters.

They ultimately decided to proceed and sent al-Nayef this message: “We intentionally kept you uninformed due to your sensitive position and concern for your safety. We informed Ibrahim al-Daoud to avoid putting you in an awkward position, knowing he would tell you. We are moving forward with the operation, and if successful, you will be Iraq’s Prime Minister, God willing.”

Essentially, they made two decisions: to entice al-Nayef with the prime ministership and to eliminate al-Nayef and al-Daoud as soon as possible. The task of storming the Republican Palace was given to the party’s regional leaders.

Before the operation, they gathered at the home of Abdul Karim al-Nadda, al-Bakr’s brother-in-law, who worked for the railway and lived near the radio station in the Salhiya area.

The emotions were high as the nine leadership members, including al-Bakr and Saddam, met with others, including Hardan al-Tikriti. The total number present was less than twenty. The plan required al-Daoud and Ghaidan to be waiting for them.

Storming the palace

The team put on military uniforms and officer badges. At the planned time, a military truck arrived, and they climbed aboard, while another group took two civilian cars. They reached the palace entrance dressed in their military gear and carrying rifles. Ghaidan was waiting at the tank battalion entrance and opened the gate for them. Several young party members, who had secretly trained to operate tanks, joined them.

They were surprised to find that the tanks around the palace were modern and the trainees had trouble operating them. Fortunately, one young man managed to start a tank and moved from one to another, helping them complete the encirclement of the palace.

They set up their command post at the tank battalion headquarters. Al-Bakr called Abdul Rahman Arif, who was asleep. The two men knew each other well. Surprised, Arif asked, “What’s going on?” Al-Bakr responded: “The revolutionary leadership has taken control of the country.”

“Please surrender to avoid any conflict. We guarantee your safety and that of your family. This is not a personal attack; it’s to prevent further bloodshed under your weak leadership. Surrender now.”

Finding the situation serious, Arif tried contacting division commanders outside Baghdad but got no response. Ten minutes later, al-Bakr called again, insisting Arif surrender. In a final warning, al-Bakr said: “If you don’t surrender, you’ll be responsible for your and your family’s safety.”

To reinforce the message, they fired artillery shells over the palace. Hearing this, Arif realized there was no negotiating and contacted them to arrange his surrender. Arif came out and was taken in a small military vehicle to the tank battalion headquarters.

At the start of the operation, a team was dispatched to arrest Prime Minister Taher Yahya at his home. This move marked the Baath Party’s return to power, achieved without any bloodshed.

Abdul Razzaq al-Nayef and Ibrahim al-Daoud.

Potential threats

When asked about Saddam Hussein’s actions during those crucial hours, al-Ali said: “Saddam acted just like the others; he wore a military uniform and carried a rifle, following the lead of the other party members.”

Despite his many criticisms today, Saddam’s bravery and ruthlessness were clear. At the time, he was not a dominant figure and did not control decisions. He was a loyal party member who followed orders.

After the Baath Party took power, its leaders saw Prime Minister al-Nayef and Defense Minister al-Daoud as potential threats.

Al-Ali, involved in the plot against them, described the situation: “We held a meeting to discuss our decisions, including removing al-Nayef and al-Daoud. Al-Bakr said we had to include al-Nayef because he knew our plan and could have turned against us. We promised him the prime ministership, and he did not betray us.”

“However, I was concerned that removing al-Nayef might be seen as treachery, given the bloody history with the Communists in 1963. I suggested we keep cooperating with him and reassess if his behavior changed. We agreed, and al-Nayef began his role as prime minister.”

A few days later, al-Bakr called an urgent meeting and urged the leadership to quickly remove al-Nayef. He explained that he was rapidly working against the party and had recruited military officers without realizing some were Baathists.

“Act fast before he can undermine us,” al-Bakr warned. “Plan his removal, and I’ll support whatever you decide.”

Officers salute al-Nayef before his ouster.

The next day, we met at the home of Saleh Mahdi Al-Ammash, the Interior Minister, since we feared al-Nayef might trap us if he knew our plans. We decided to remove both al-Nayef and al-Daoud.

We had military units in Jordan. We planned for al-Daoud to inspect them while secretly sending party members to arrest him and send him to Spain. At the same time, we would act against al-Nayef.

On July 30, al-Daoud was captured and sent to Spain. Meanwhile, we targeted al-Nayef. After lunch at the palace, he went to al-Bakr’s office. Saddam and I entered with rifles and demanded his surrender. At first, he resisted but then begged us, citing his family.

We needed to act quickly and discreetly. We told al-Nayef to leave as if nothing had happened and warned him not to signal his guards. He was escorted to a car by Saddam, who warned him not to resist. The car left through a rear gate, and al-Nayef was flown out to Morocco.



The Saudi Riyal: Tracing Three Centuries from Diriyah’s Markets to Global Financial Icon

The Saudi riyal serves as a living record of three centuries of progress, representing not merely a unit of value but a document of the nation’s journey and renaissance. (SPA)
The Saudi riyal serves as a living record of three centuries of progress, representing not merely a unit of value but a document of the nation’s journey and renaissance. (SPA)
TT

The Saudi Riyal: Tracing Three Centuries from Diriyah’s Markets to Global Financial Icon

The Saudi riyal serves as a living record of three centuries of progress, representing not merely a unit of value but a document of the nation’s journey and renaissance. (SPA)
The Saudi riyal serves as a living record of three centuries of progress, representing not merely a unit of value but a document of the nation’s journey and renaissance. (SPA)

The history of the Saudi riyal is deeply intertwined with the evolution of the Saudi state, evolving from its early days as a fluctuating medium of exchange to its modern, regulated form through significant political, social, and economic transformations, reported the Saudi Press Agency on Saturday.

A comprehensive overview of this trajectory begins with the diverse currencies of the First Saudi State, passes through the regulatory milestones of the unification era, and culminates in today’s sophisticated monetary structure.

First Saudi State: Vibrant markets and multiple currencies

With the establishment of the First Saudi State in the mid-12th century AH (mid-18th century CE), the Arabian Peninsula lacked a unified monetary system, and a variety of currencies circulated, driven by trade across a vast geography.

According to the historical guide for Founding Day published by the King Abdulaziz Foundation for Research and Archives (Darah), First Saudi State founder Imam Muhammad bin Saud bin Muhammad bin Muqrin focused on building a robust economic foundation by securing financial resources and encouraging trade between Diriyah and other regions. Consequently, markets in Diriyah and Najd flourished, attracting merchants who traded in gold, silver, and barter.

As noted in Dr. Abdullah Al-Saleh Al-Uthaimin’s "History of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia," popular currencies included the Austrian silver Maria Theresa thaler, locally known as Al-Riyal Al-Fransi (literally the French riyal), which became a staple due to its consistent purity and weight.

According to Dr. Mohammed Al-Manshat’s "Organizations of the First Saudi State," Diriyah’s markets reached a peak of prosperity during the reign of Imam Saud bin Abdulaziz. Political and security stability allowed merchants to move freely, facilitating smooth and reliable financial transactions.

The history of the Saudi riyal is deeply intertwined with the evolution of the Saudi state. (SPA)

Regional diversity and variety of coins

Monetary patterns varied by region. In Najd, denominations such as Al-Jadeeda, Al-Khurda, Al-Muhammadiya, and Al-Mushakhas were used according to market needs. Al-Khurda served as the smallest unit, while Al-Jadeeda was used for everyday transactions.

In Al-Ahsa, an agriculturally vital hub, a local currency called Al-Tawila, a bent copper bar combined with silver, was commonly used. Meanwhile, the Hijaz experienced a high degree of currency diversification, as Makkah and Madinah welcomed pilgrims carrying various coins from across the Muslim world.

The reign of King Abdulaziz: Foundations of organization

The entry of King Abdulaziz bin Abdulrahman Al Saud into Riyadh in 1319 AH (1902) marked a pivotal economic turning point. Initially, he maintained the existing currencies to preserve market stability while gradually introducing a unified currency.

According to the Saudi Central Bank (SAMA), an early significant step was counterstamping circulating coins with the word "Najd" to indicate official adoption. After the unification of the Hijaz and Najd in 1343 AH (1925), the word "Hijaz" was added to reflect the expanding political unity.

By 1343 AH, monetary reform shifted from stamping to minting. SAMA records show the issuance of the first Saudi copper coins in half- and quarter-qirsh denominations, bearing King Abdulaziz’s name and the mint location, Umm Al-Qura. These were the first legal-tender coins of the Saudi state.

In 1346 AH (1927), King Abdulaziz abolished all foreign circulating currencies and introduced the first pure Saudi silver riyal. To support this, he issued a royal decree - published in the Umm Al-Qura gazette - outlining the state’s new monetary policies. After the formal unification of the Kingdom in 1351 AH (1932), the riyal became the official currency. By 1354 AH (1935), a new silver riyal bearing the name "Kingdom of Saudi Arabia" was issued, symbolizing national unity and stability.

Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency: Regulation and supervision

To manage the expansion of economic activity, King Abdulaziz issued two royal decrees in 1371 AH (1952) establishing the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA), now the Saudi Central Bank. SAMA was tasked with regulating currency issuance, maintaining its value, and supervising the banking system. It began operations in 1372 AH (1953), focusing on introducing the Saudi gold pound and completing the minting of the silver riyal.

With the establishment of the First Saudi State in the mid-18th century CE, the Arabian Peninsula lacked a unified monetary system. (SPA)

Pilgrim receipts and paper currency

Recognizing that heavy coins were becoming impractical for a modernizing economy and burdensome for pilgrims, King Abdulaziz sought a more efficient solution. This led to the introduction of "pilgrim receipts" by SAMA in 1372 AH (1953). Initially issued in 10-riyal denominations, these receipts were printed in Arabic, Persian, English, Urdu, Turkish, and Malay.

Though intended as a temporary convenience to be exchanged for silver, the receipts quickly gained the trust of merchants, citizens, and pilgrims alike. This success led SAMA to issue five-riyal notes in 1373 AH (1954) and one-riyal notes in 1375 AH (1956).

The public’s preference for these receipts over heavy coins paved the way for a permanent transition to paper currency. In 1381 AH (1961), the first official paper issue of the Saudi riyal was released during the reign of King Saud bin Abdulaziz, featuring enhanced security and depictions of historical landmarks.

The sixth issue: Trust and security

The sixth issue of the Saudi currency was released in 1438 AH (2016) under the reign of Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, bearing the slogan "Trust and Security." This series incorporated the latest global technologies and security standards for both paper and metal denominations.

Furthermore, the adoption of the official Saudi Riyal Symbol on February 20, 2025, reinforced the Kingdom’s financial and national identity. The symbol’s design, inspired by Arabic calligraphy, reflects pride in the cultural heritage that defines the nation.

From the barter systems of Diriyah to the internationally recognized symbol of today, the Saudi riyal serves as a living record of three centuries of progress, representing not merely a unit of value but a document of the nation’s journey and renaissance.


Ukrainians, Scattered across Europe, Trapped in Limbo by War

A man walks past snow-covered plants at the Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine in Kyiv on February 11, 2026, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.  (Photo by Genya SAVILOV / AFP)
A man walks past snow-covered plants at the Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine in Kyiv on February 11, 2026, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. (Photo by Genya SAVILOV / AFP)
TT

Ukrainians, Scattered across Europe, Trapped in Limbo by War

A man walks past snow-covered plants at the Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine in Kyiv on February 11, 2026, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.  (Photo by Genya SAVILOV / AFP)
A man walks past snow-covered plants at the Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine in Kyiv on February 11, 2026, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. (Photo by Genya SAVILOV / AFP)

Maryna Bondarenko says she has three suitcases packed in her apartment in Poland, waiting for the day when peace returns to Ukraine.

The 51-year-old journalist fled Kyiv with her son and mother after Russia launched its invasion on February 24, 2022. She thought they would be abroad for a month or two until the war ended, reported Reuters.

Four years later, she is still there, working in a Ukrainian-language newsroom that caters to a community of more than 1.5 million Ukrainians living in Poland.

"There were so many moments when we thought: 'This is it, we're finally going back.' We went to the post office several times, packed our belongings into boxes, absolutely certain that we were going back," she said.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has triggered the largest refugee crisis in Europe since World War Two. More than 5 million Ukrainians are scattered across Europe, according to UN figures, many of them in Central and Eastern Europe.

SEPARATED FROM ‌HUSBAND

Roughly three-quarters of ‌the refugees are women and children, after Ukraine imposed martial law prohibiting men of military ‌age from ⁠leaving the ⁠country.

Bondarenko longs to be reunited with her husband, Andrij Dudko, a 44-year-old former TV cameraman who is serving as a drone operator on the front line. But waves of Russian air strikes - which have cut power to tens of thousands of people in Kyiv during a bitter winter - convinced her to stay.

"We get ready to leave, and then there's another massive attack. We get ready again, and then cold winter comes and there is no heating, no power, no water. And I just can't bring my child there, under the rockets."

In Poland, large Ukrainian communities have sprung up in cities such as Warsaw and Krakow, sometimes prompting tensions with local residents ⁠who complain of the new arrivals taking welfare benefits and jobs.

"I want to go home, ‌I really do. I know it won’t be easy," said Bondarenko, adding ‌that the country she returns to will be profoundly changed.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s government hopes that 70% of Ukrainians abroad will return, once ‌the war ends. But surveys have shown that, over time, the share of Ukrainians who say they want to go back ‌is declining.

For many among the younger generation of Ukrainians abroad - like Bondarenko's 11-year-old son Danylo - the country is a distant memory.

He likes Poland, despite experiencing some hostility toward Ukrainians in school.

"I don't really remember anyone from Ukraine. I remember I had one friend, but I do not really remember him and I’ve lost contact with him," he said. "I don't think that I will return to Ukraine."

'LIFE TURNED OUT DIFFERENTLY'

Iryna Kushnir ‌and Olga Yermolenko, who were friends at high school in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv, rekindled their friendship after they both fled to Istanbul at the start of ⁠the war, part of a ⁠far smaller number of Ukrainians who sought shelter in Türkiye.

"I thought the war would end quickly, so I didn't plan to stay in Istanbul for long," said Kushnir, 42, who left her 19-year-old daughter Sofia behind in Ukraine to study.

But four years later, she is married to a Turkish man and has a teaching job at the Ukrainian department of Istanbul University.

"Like all Ukrainians, I planned to return home, but life turned out differently," said Kushnir, who says she is proud that her daughter has chosen to remain in Ukraine.

Her friend, Yermolenko, 43, works remotely from Istanbul as a financial specialist for Ukrainian clients. Her mother Tetyana, 73, still lives in Kharkiv and they are constantly in touch.

"I cannot say I am involved 100% in Turkish life. It is a bit strange feeling to be caught between your previous life and a possible future life," said Yermolenko, who has started learning Turkish. She still closely follows events in Ukraine but tries not to think about how long the war will last.

"I open the news - there's a Telegram channel that reports what's happening in Kharkiv in real time - and I see a missile flying toward my home," she said. "In that moment, the feeling is terrifying. I’m very scared. And of course, I immediately call my mom to make sure she's okay."


Trump Pushes US Toward War with Iran as Advisers Urge Focus on Economy

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing at the White House, following the Supreme Court's ruling that Trump had exceeded his authority when he imposed tariffs, in Washington, D.C., US, February 20, 2026. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz REFILE
FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing at the White House, following the Supreme Court's ruling that Trump had exceeded his authority when he imposed tariffs, in Washington, D.C., US, February 20, 2026. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz REFILE
TT

Trump Pushes US Toward War with Iran as Advisers Urge Focus on Economy

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing at the White House, following the Supreme Court's ruling that Trump had exceeded his authority when he imposed tariffs, in Washington, D.C., US, February 20, 2026. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz REFILE
FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing at the White House, following the Supreme Court's ruling that Trump had exceeded his authority when he imposed tariffs, in Washington, D.C., US, February 20, 2026. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz REFILE

President Donald Trump has pushed the United States to the brink of war with Iran even as aides urge him to focus more on voters' economic worries, highlighting the political risks of military escalation ahead of this year's midterm elections.

Trump has ordered a huge buildup of forces in the Middle East and preparations for a potential multi-week air attack on Iran. But he has not laid out in detail to the American public why he might be leading the US into its most aggressive action against Iran since its 1979 revolution.

Trump's fixation on Iran has emerged as the starkest example yet of how foreign policy, including his expanded use of raw military force, has topped his agenda in the first 13 months of his second term, often overshadowing domestic issues like the cost of living that public opinion polls show are much higher priorities for most Americans.

A senior White House official said that despite Trump's bellicose rhetoric there was still no "unified support" within the administration to go ahead with an attack on Iran.

Trump's aides are also mindful of the need to avoid sending a "distracted message" to undecided voters more concerned about the economy, the official told Reuters on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press.

White House advisers and Republican campaign officials want Trump focused on the economy, a point ‌that was stressed ‌as the top campaign issue at a private briefing this week with numerous cabinet secretaries, according to a person who ‌attended. Trump was ⁠not present.

A second ⁠White House official, responding to Reuters questions for this story, said Trump's foreign policy agenda "has directly translated into wins for the American people."

"All of the President's actions put America First – be it through making the entire world safer or bringing economic deliverables home to our country," the official said.

November's election will decide whether Trump's Republican Party continues to control both chambers of the US Congress. Loss of one or both chambers to opposition Democrats would pose a challenge to Trump in the final years of his presidency.

Rob Godfrey, a Republican strategist, said a prolonged conflict with Iran would pose significant political peril for Trump and his fellow Republicans.

"The president has to keep in mind the political base that propelled him to the Republican nomination - three consecutive times - and that continues to stick by him is skeptical of foreign engagement and foreign entanglements because ending the era of 'forever wars' was an explicit campaign promise," Godfrey said.

Republicans plan ⁠to campaign on individual tax cuts enacted by Congress last year, as well as programs to lower housing and some ‌prescription drug costs.

TOUGHER FOE THAN VENEZUELA

Despite some dissenting voices, many in Trump's isolationist-minded "Make America Great Again" movement supported the ‌lightning raid that deposed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro last month. But he could face more pushback if he steers the US into war with Iran, which would be a much more formidable ‌foe.

Trump, who has repeatedly threatened to strike Iran if it does not reach an agreement on its nuclear program, reiterated his warning on Friday, saying Tehran "better negotiate a ‌fair deal."

The US targeted nuclear sites in Iran in June, and Iran has threatened to retaliate fiercely if attacked again.

Trump won reelection in 2024 on his 'America First' platform in large part because of his promise to reduce inflation and avoid costly foreign conflicts, but he has been struggling to convince Americans that he is making inroads in bringing down high prices, public opinion polls show.

Still, Republican strategist Lauren Cooley said Trump's supporters could support military action against Iran if it is decisive and limited.

"The White House will need to clearly connect any action to protecting American security and ‌economic stability at home," she said.

Even so, with polls showing little public appetite for another foreign war and Trump struggling to stay on message to fully address voters' economic angst, any escalation with Iran is a risky move by a president ⁠who acknowledged in a recent interview with Reuters ⁠that his party could struggle in the midterms.

VARIED WAR REASONS

Foreign policy, historically, has rarely been a decisive issue for midterm voters. But, having deployed a large force of aircraft carriers, other warships and warplanes to the Middle East, Trump may have boxed himself in to carrying out military action unless Iran makes major concessions that it has so far shown little willingness to accept. Otherwise he may risk looking weak internationally.

The reasons Trump has given for a possible attack have been vague and varied. He initially threatened strikes in January in reaction to the Iranian government's bloody crackdown on nationwide street protests but then backed down.

He has more recently pinned his military threats to demands that Iran end its nuclear program and has floated the idea of "regime change," but he and his aides have not said how air strikes could make that happen.

The second White House official insisted that Trump "has been clear that he always prefers diplomacy, and that Iran should make a deal before it is too late." The president, the official added, has also stressed that Iran "cannot have a nuclear weapon or the capacity to build one, and that they cannot enrich uranium."

What many see as a lack of clarity stands in stark contrast to the extensive public case made by then-President George W. Bush for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which he said was meant to rid the country of weapons of mass destruction. Though that mission ended up being based on bad intelligence and false claims, Bush's stated war aims were clear at the outset.

Godfrey, the Republican strategist, said independent voters - crucial in deciding the outcomes of close elections - will be scrutinizing how Trump handles Iran.

"Midterm voters and his base will be waiting for the president to make his case," he said.