• Democrats criticise Trump for waging “war of choice”.
• Three US troops killed, more wounded so far.
• Trump calls for Iranians to “take back” their country.
  

Trump administration officials acknowledged in closed-door briefings with congressional staff on Sunday that there was no intelligence suggesting Iran planned to attack US forces first, two people familiar with the matter said.

The United States and Israel launched their most ambitious attacks on Iran in decades on Saturday, martyring Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, sinking Iranian warships and hitting more than 1,000 targets so far, officials say.

But Sunday’s remarks to Congress appeared to undercut one of the key arguments for the war made by senior administration officials.

They told reporters the day before that President Donald Trump decided to launch the attacks in part because of indicators that Iranians might strike US forces in the Middle East “perhaps preemptively.”

Trump, one of the officials said, was not going to “sit back and allow American forces in the region to absorb attacks.”

Pentagon briefings lasted over 90 minutes

Pentagon officials briefed Democratic and Republican staff of several national security committees in both the Senate and the House of Representatives for more than 90 minutes on the unfolding US attack in Iran, White House spokesperson Dylan Johnson said earlier.

In the briefings, administration officials emphasised that Iran’s ballistic missiles and proxy forces in the region posed an imminent threat to US interests, but there was no intelligence about Tehran attacking US forces first, the two sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters.

Trump said the attack, which is expected to run for weeks, aimed to ensure Iran could not have a nuclear weapon, contain its missile program and eliminate threats to the United States and its allies.

He has urged Iranians to rise up and topple the government.

Democrats criticise ‘war of choice’

Still, Democrats have accused Trump of waging a war of choice and have taken aim at his arguments for abandoning peace talks that mediator Oman said still held promise.

Trump has argued, without presenting evidence, that Iran was on track to soon secure the ability to strike the United States with a ballistic missile.

His missile claim was not backed by US intelligence reports, and appeared to be exaggerated, sources familiar with the reports have told Reuters.

Questions about the justification for the war come as the US military revealed on Sunday the first American casualties of the conflict.

Scepticism on regime change

Following the martyrdom of Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei, many senior US officials remain sceptical that the US and Israeli military operation against the Islamic Republic will lead to regime change in the near term.

Before and after the start of the attack, US officials, including US President Trump, had suggested that toppling the nation’s repressive governing system was one of several US goals, in addition to crippling Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs.

“I call upon all Iranian patriots who yearn for freedom to seize this moment … and take back your country,” Trump said on Sunday in a video posted on Truth Social.

But three US officials familiar with US intelligence said there is serious scepticism that Iran’s battered opposition can topple the theocratic, authoritarian governing system that has been in place since 1979.

No officials consulted by Reuters completely ruled out the possibility of the fall of Iran’s government, which currently is buffeted by key personnel losses from ongoing US and Israeli air strikes and is deeply unpopular following a January round of extraordinarily violent repression.

But it is far from likely or even probable in the near term, they said.

Reuters reported earlier that Central Intelligence Agency assessments presented to the White House in the weeks before the Iran attack concluded that if Khamenei was killed, he could be replaced by hard-line figures from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or equally hard-line clerics, two sources said.

One US official with knowledge of internal White House deliberations said IRGC officials are unlikely to voluntarily capitulate in part because they have benefited from a vast patronage network designed to maintain internal loyalty.

The CIA assessments followed at least one report from a separate US intelligence agency which noted that there had been no IRGC defections during a massive round of anti-government protests in January that was met with brutal force by Iranian security forces.

Such defections would likely be a precondition of any successful revolution, according to three additional sources. Those sources requested that the specific intelligence agency not be named.

All of the sources Reuters spoke with for this story requested anonymity to discuss intelligence assessments.

Trump himself said on Sunday he planned to reopen communications with Iran, suggesting Washington does not see the government going anywhere, at least in the immediate term.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, while the CIA declined to comment.

Lots of debate, less consensus

On Sunday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said a leadership council composed of himself, the judiciary head and a member of the powerful Guardian Council had temporarily assumed the duties of Supreme Leader.

Security chief Ali Larijani accused the United States and Israel of trying to plunder and disintegrate Iran and warned “secessionist groups” of a harsh response if they attempted any action, state television said on Sunday, after the two countries launched a wave of air attacks on Iran that included the bombing of a girls’ primary school. Reuters could not independently confirm the reports from the state media.

The US intelligence discussions about the implications of a possible Khamenei assassination have not been limited to whether it might lead to a change in government leadership.

Two of the US officials said that, since January, there has been significant debate – but no consensus – among officials of various agencies about the extent to which Khamenei’s assasination would lead to a significant shift in the way Iran approached negotiations with the US regarding its nuclear program.

US officials have also debated the extent to which Khamenei’s death or ouster would deter the country from rebuilding its missile or nuclear facilities and capacities, said those officials, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive internal conversations.

Following the January protests, Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy and a key ally, spoke several times with Iranian opposition figure Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last shah, raising questions about the extent to which the administration would support his installment should Iran’s government fall, two officials said.

But in recent weeks, senior US officials have become increasingly pessimistic that any opposition figure backed by Washington would realistically be able to control the country, those officials added.

“At the end of the day, once US and Israeli strikes stop, if the Iranian people come out, their success in promoting the end of the regime will depend on the rank and file standing aside or aligning with them,” said Jonathan Panikoff, a former high-ranking US intelligence official who is now at the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington.

“Otherwise, the remnants of the regime, those with the weapons, are likely to use them to keep power.”

Three US troops killed

Three US troops were killed and five seriously wounded, US Central Command said on Sunday, adding that several other US troops suffered minor shrapnel injuries and concussions.

US aircraft and warships have struck more than 1,000 Iranian targets since Trump ordered the start of major combat operations, the military said.

The strikes include B-2 stealth bombers dropping 2,000-lb (900-kg) bombs on hardened, underground Iranian missile facilities.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll on Sunday showed 27% of Americans approved of the strikes, while 43% disapproved and 29% were not sure.