Israeli Airstrikes Hit Tehran as Trump Delays U.S. Strikes and Cites Ongoing Talks

Israeli military action follows U.S. pause on planned strikes, while conflicting accounts emerge over the status of negotiations with Iran.

By yourNEWS Media Newsroom

The Israeli Air Force confirmed Monday that it launched a new wave of strikes targeting infrastructure in Tehran, shortly after President Donald Trump announced a temporary halt to planned U.S. attacks on Iranian energy facilities.

“The Air Force has begun, a short while ago, another wave of strikes targeting infrastructure of the Iranian terror regime across Tehran,” the Israeli military said in a statement.

The strikes come amid heightened tensions following a U.S. ultimatum that Iran reopen the Strait of Hormuz or face potential military action against its civilian power grid. Iranian officials did not reopen the strait and warned they would respond by targeting regional energy infrastructure, including desalination facilities in the Persian Gulf.

Despite the escalating situation, Trump announced a pause in U.S. military action, ordering a five-day delay on potential strikes. In a statement, he said recent discussions with Iran had been “very good and productive.”

Iranian officials have disputed that characterization. The Iranian Foreign Ministry stated that no direct negotiations are underway, describing the exchanges as limited communications conveyed through intermediaries, including Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan.

The divergence in accounts underscores uncertainty surrounding diplomatic efforts as military activity continues.

Former National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent, who resigned in opposition to the conflict, said the Israeli strikes could complicate efforts to reduce tensions. In a post, he wrote, “Step 1 in deescalation must be restraining the Israelis, otherwise all efforts to negotiate will follow this pattern: POTUS publicly announces deescalation. Israel takes major strikes to destroy the negotiations & in turn weaken our ability to negotiate.”

The developments highlight a rapidly evolving situation in which military operations and diplomatic messaging are unfolding simultaneously, with differing narratives from involved parties regarding the status and effectiveness of negotiations.