As confusion persists, with U.S. President Donald Trump and senior administration officials offering different accounts of the purpose of the strikes against Iran, concern is growing within the Republican Party as well about the administration being unclear and the resulting risk of a prolonged conflict.

On the 3rd (local time), at a press conference held during a bilateral meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House in Washington, President Trump said, “We were negotiating with these lunatics (the Iranian government), and I thought they would strike first.”

Trump added, “If we did not do it, they (Iran) seemed likely to strike first,” indicating that the perceived threat of an Iranian preemptive attack influenced the decision to carry out the strikes on Iran. This runs counter to a statement the previous day by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the strikes were launched preemptively to block Iranian retaliation for an attack by Israel.

After the president offered a view that contradicted his position the previous day, Secretary Rubio reversed his claim within a day. Rubio said that day, “The key was the decision by the president that we would not be attacked first,” and, “That decision was that we would not allow Iran to hide behind its ballistic missile program.”

Earlier, President Trump and senior administration officials had presented varying justifications and objectives for this military operation, including ‘removal of an (Iranian) imminent threat’, ‘regime change’, and ‘the theory of an Israeli preemptive strike on Iran’, creating a confused picture.

Most Republican lawmakers have not publicly objected to the strikes against Iran, but fissures are reportedly widening within the party as the administration provides inconsistent explanations of the purpose of the war. A Republican member of the House, speaking anonymously, told Politico, “Most Republican lawmakers want clearer objectives than we have now regarding the strikes on Iran.” Senator Todd Young of Indiana was said to have raised concerns at a closed-door Republican luncheon that day about how President Trump and the Republican leadership have handled the response to the strikes on Iran.

The U.S. Senate on the 4th and the House on the 5th are scheduled to put to a vote a ‘War Powers Resolution’ that would require congressional approval if the president deploys military force against Iran. As Republicans hold majorities in both chambers, the resolution is likely to be voted down.

However, some Republican lawmakers suggested they could withdraw support for the administration if the conflict in Iran turns into a long war or if the United States deploys ground troops. Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri said, “The deployment of ground troops is an unacceptable red line,” adding, “I think congressional approval is necessary to deploy ground forces for a long-term conflict.” Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota said the decision to strike Iran was correct, but added, “All that is needed is for (President Trump) to reaffirm that this operation is a short-term measure rather than a long-term plan.”