Former U.S. President Donald Trump has once again used his signature timeline of “two weeks” when referring to a potentially critical foreign policy decision—this time, regarding military action against Iran. During a White House press briefing on Thursday, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt relayed Trump’s message, stating that the former president would decide “within the next two weeks” whether or not to proceed with military action against Iran.
Leavitt quoted Trump directly, saying:
“Given the possibility that talks with Iran could happen soon—though nothing is certain—I plan to decide within the next two weeks whether to take action or not.”
The remark quickly sparked widespread reaction, not just because of the seriousness of the potential decision, but also due to the repetition of a phrase Trump has used numerous times throughout his political career. From infrastructure plans to tax reform, and from healthcare to immigration policy, Trump’s “two weeks” timeline has become something of a rhetorical trademark—often signaling delays or serving as a placeholder for complex decisions still in progress.
Why the ‘Two Weeks’ Phrase Stands Out
Political analysts and journalists were quick to point out the déjà vu, noting that this vague timeframe has often preceded either extended delays or no decision at all. In this situation, the potential consequences are particularly serious.
A military strike on Iran could escalate tensions in the Middle East, disrupt global oil markets, and invite retaliation from Iranian forces or their regional allies.
While Trump’s statement hints at the possibility of diplomatic engagement—noting there is a chance negotiations with Tehran could materialize—the ambiguity of his words leaves much room for interpretation. Is this timeline a genuine deadline for a serious foreign policy move? Or is it another instance of strategic ambiguity to maintain pressure without committing to immediate action?
International and Domestic Reactions
So far, the Iranian government has not issued a formal response to Trump’s remarks, but the international community is closely monitoring the situation. Within the U.S., reactions remain mixed. Supporters see the timeline as a way to keep diplomatic channels open while retaining military leverage. Critics argue it reflects a lack of clear policy direction and could unnecessarily raise tensions in an already volatile region.
What Comes Next?
With Trump still a dominant figure in U.S. politics and a leading candidate in the upcoming election cycle, his foreign policy stance continues to attract global attention. Whether or not the “two weeks” timeline will result in definitive action remains to be seen, but history suggests the phrase may signal further waiting—not clarity.
As the countdown begins, both domestic and international observers are bracing for what could either be a pivotal decision or another extension of uncertainty in U.S.-Iran relations.
