President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he ordered US forces to join Israel’s military action against Iran because he believed Tehran was preparing to strike first, offering a rationale that differed from comments made earlier by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The differing explanations have drawn scrutiny as the administration faces questions over the circumstances that led to Washington’s entry into the conflict.

Speaking to reporters at the White House during a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Trump rejected suggestions that Israel had pushed the United States into the confrontation. He said he was convinced Iran was on the verge of launching attacks and argued that preemptive action was necessary to prevent greater casualties. Trump did not publicly provide evidence to support his assessment.

A day earlier, Rubio had told reporters that US action was prompted by concerns that Iran would retaliate against American forces following anticipated Israeli strikes. He said US officials believed that failing to act preemptively could result in higher casualties. On Tuesday, when asked about his remarks, Rubio reiterated that the president had determined the United States would not allow itself to be “hit first.”

Also Read: Trump Says He Knows Iran's Next Leader and Hints at 'Good Candidates' After Khamenei's Death

Iran has described the US assault as unprovoked. The developments follow diplomatic contacts in Geneva last week between US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner and Iranian officials, mediated by Oman. According to two senior US administration officials, the talks centred on Iran’s uranium enrichment programme. They said the American side pressed for Iran to give up enrichment activities, while Tehran proposed continuing enrichment at higher levels at the Tehran Research Reactor.

The officials said US envoys viewed Iran’s position as an attempt to delay negotiations and preserve capabilities that could potentially lead to a nuclear weapon. Iran has consistently denied seeking to develop nuclear arms. The envoys briefed Trump following the talks, reportedly indicating that a potential agreement could take months to negotiate. US military strikes began shortly thereafter.

The debate over the origins of the conflict has prompted criticism from some conservative commentators and Democratic lawmakers, who have questioned the administration’s decision-making process. With midterm congressional elections approaching, the White House has sought to clarify its position while maintaining that the decision to act was taken in the interest of national security.

Also Read: Doha, Dubai, Manama Under Fire, Signalling a Rapid Escalation of Hostilities in the Gulf Region