Faced with fault lines inside his own administration over Iran policy, President Donald Trump rejected an Israeli plan, which would have required American backing and potential U.S. involvement, to strike Iran’s nuclear program as soon as May, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.

The Times reported that Trump chose instead to pursue diplomatic talks with Iran, which began last Saturday and have fueled concerns among Iran hawks in both the U.S. and Israel that the U.S. may make concessions on key issues that would allow Iran to retain some of its nuclear program. He reportedly told Israeli officials he would not back a military strike while talks are ongoing.

Vice President JD Vance, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles all reportedly weighed in against the plan. Vance and Gabbard in particular have been seen as key figures in the more isolationist wing of the administration, and Hegseth’s Pentagon has installed several leaders from that faction in key roles.

National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and Gen. Erik Kurilla, who leads U.S. Central Command, were both initially more supportive, though Waltz later grew skeptical about the plan’s chances of success, according to the New York Times reporting.

Administration officials, particularly Vance, have reportedly been the strongest advocates for diplomacy with Iran, and there is ongoing disagreement — some of which has emerged publicly — over the concessions that Iran would need to make for a diplomatic deal to be reached. 

The Times story includes details about the sort of attacks under consideration, including Israeli-led bombing runs with U.S. involvement or even Israeli commando raids into buried nuclear sites.

Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said that this leak could undermine efforts to forcefully negotiate with Iran.

“There is no deal that permanently halts Iran’s nuclear weapons program without a credible military threat,” Dubowitz told Jewish Insider. “It’s a serious error to signal — especially in outlets like The New York Times — that military plans may be off the table, even temporarily. Unless Iran’s leaders believe their regime is at risk, they will never agree to a deal that truly ends the nuclear threat.”

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), a pro-Israel Democrat, blasted the Trump administration for rejecting the Israeli plan against Iran.

“If Joe Biden had done this, Republicans would be outraged. Also this leak jeopardizes Israel’s security. There should be no deal with Iran until their nuclear program is gone,” Moskowitz said.

Michael Makovsky, the CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, also argued that the leaks that produced the article undermine Israel and the U.S.’ negotiating position with Iran.

“This article, involving leaked timing and operational details, reflects a horrible betrayal of our close ally Israel, evidently by administration officials who oppose an Israeli-U.S. attack,” Makovsky said. “Pres[ident] Trump should order an investigation of this leak and fire the offenders”

But he also predicted Israel will need to go ahead with military strikes in the coming months regardless of U.S. support.

“The article might be counter-productive in one way, as the details of U.S. doubts about an Israeli strike will make Iran even less likely to make meaningful concessions in negotiations,” Makovsky continued. “Whether or not the article leads to some altering in Israeli military planning, the fundamentals remain for the imperative of an Israeli military operation in the coming months against Iran’s nuclear program, with or without U.S. collaboration.”

Former Ambassador Daniel Shapiro, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council who previously served as U.S. ambassador to Israel and a senior State and Defense Department official, said the U.S. and Israel should be discussing plans for strikes given that diplomatic success is unlikely.

“It is understandable that the Trump administration wants to hold off on military action while it tests diplomatic pathways to dismantling Iran’s nuclear program. But the clock is ticking and chances of diplomatic success are low,” Shapiro told JI. “So the decision point on military action is coming. It is appropriate for US and Israeli military leaders to engage in intense planning discussions so their leaders have the best options available when the moment of truth arrives.”