President Joe Biden recently reviewed potential U.S. military options targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities during a confidential White House meeting led by National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, three sources familiar with the matter told Axios. The discussions, which took place several weeks ago, explored how the U.S. could respond if Iran advanced toward nuclear weaponization before January 20.

While no strike was authorized, the meeting underscores growing concerns about Iran’s accelerating nuclear program and the potential for heightened tensions in the Middle East during the final weeks of Biden’s presidency.

According to officials who spoke to Axios, the meeting was not prompted by new intelligence or an imminent threat. Instead, it was part of “prudent scenario planning” aimed at preparing for contingencies if Iran enriches uranium to weapons-grade levels. Sullivan presented Biden with several military options but did not make any formal recommendations, sources said.

“This was not a yes or no decision-making session,” a senior U.S. official clarified. “It was a strategic assessment of the landscape and how the U.S. should react if Iran crosses a red line in its nuclear development.”

Another source emphasized that there are currently no active discussions about military action against Iran. However, the potential for escalation remains as Iran’s nuclear program inches closer to producing weapons-grade material.

Iran has increased its uranium enrichment to 60% purity, a short step from the 90% required to build a nuclear bomb. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recently reported that Iran has accumulated enough 60%-enriched uranium to produce at least four nuclear bombs if further enriched.

Though Iranian officials insist the program is purely for civilian use, their rhetoric has shifted in recent months. Several Iranian leaders have publicly hinted at reconsidering Iran’s nuclear doctrine, fueling suspicions in Washington and Jerusalem.

Sullivan recently warned at a New York conference, “You can see it in the public statements. Iranian officials are raising the question of whether their doctrine needs to change. That cannot be ignored.”

Some of Biden’s aides argue that Iran’s weakening position presents a rare opportunity for a decisive strike. Iran’s proxy forces, including Hezbollah and Houthi rebels, have faced major losses during ongoing conflicts in the region, particularly in their war with Israel.

Additionally, U.S. and Israeli strikes have degraded Iran’s air defense systems and missile capabilities, potentially reducing the risk of retaliation.

“This may be the best chance to act without triggering widespread conflict,” one source said. “Iran’s proxies are on the back foot, and its defenses are compromised. That combination improves the odds of success.”

However, the political risks of initiating military action during a lame-duck period are high. Striking Iran could ignite broader conflict in the Middle East, overshadow Biden’s foreign policy legacy, and hand a volatile situation to his successor, Donald Trump.

Biden is said to have focused on the urgency of the situation during the meeting, asking whether Iran’s actions justify immediate military intervention. Ultimately, no final decisions were made.

Iran’s nuclear program has been a persistent source of tension between Tehran and the West. U.S. intelligence and Israeli officials have long tracked suspicious activities, including uranium enrichment, weaponization research, and ballistic missile development.

In October, an Israeli airstrike targeted Iran’s Parchin military complex, damaging equipment believed to be vital for developing nuclear warheads. The strike, which followed reports of Iranian research into bomb design, temporarily slowed Iran’s progress.

Nevertheless, intelligence agencies believe that if Iran decided to build a bomb, it could take as little as one year to develop a functional nuclear weapon. The Parchin attack created a bottleneck, but officials remain wary of Iran’s advancing capabilities.

The Biden administration has pursued a dual-track strategy of diplomacy and pressure, but efforts to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal have stalled. In the absence of a formal agreement, the U.S. has relied on sanctions and covert operations to slow Iran’s nuclear advances.

At the same time, Israel has conducted hundreds of strikes targeting Iranian assets in Syria and Iraq to disrupt arms transfers and missile development. Israeli officials view Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat and have signaled willingness to act unilaterally if necessary.

The U.S. has also increased intelligence-sharing with Israel and regional allies, signaling its commitment to countering Iranian aggression.

In spring 2024, the Biden administration quietly warned Iran about suspicious nuclear activities. Despite this, the IAEA and U.S. intelligence continue to report worrisome developments.

As Biden’s term nears its conclusion, Sullivan and other officials have briefed President-elect Trump’s team about the situation, ensuring continuity in monitoring Iran’s nuclear program.

“They may choose a different course,” Sullivan said, “but we want to ensure they understand the severity of the threat.”

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)