Washington: The White House strongly rebutted critical reporting in major US newspapers regarding the Trump administration’s handling of the war with Iran and its impact on global energy markets, accusing the media of spreading a “fake narrative” about the military campaign’s objectives.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed reports suggesting confusion or “mixed messaging” about Operation Epic Fury, calling them false. “The left-wing media is lying and pushing a fake narrative that there has been ‘mixed messaging’ about the objectives of Operation Epic Fury,” she said on social media.
Her remarks came after The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal raised questions about the administration’s planning, assessment of Iran’s response, and rapid policy shifts on emergency oil market interventions.
Leavitt insisted that the administration had clearly communicated its military goals from the start. “From the beginning, President Trump and his entire team have consistently laid out clear objectives to the American people about what the US Military seeks to accomplish through these ongoing successful major combat operations,” she said.
Earlier, President Donald Trump had outlined the mission publicly on March 2: destroying Iran’s missile capabilities, annihilating its navy, preventing nuclear weapon acquisition, and stopping the Iranian regime from supporting terrorist groups abroad. Senior defence officials have echoed similar objectives.
On March 4, the US war secretary said the mission was “laser-focused: obliterate Iran’s missiles and drones and facilities that produce them, annihilate its navy and critical security infrastructure, and sever their pathway to nuclear weapons.” Admiral Brad Cooper described the campaign as a major operation aimed at reducing Iran’s long-standing threat to the United States.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the administration initially opposed a major intervention in global oil markets but reversed course within hours, urging allies to support an unprecedented release of emergency oil reserves. The report suggested the change reflected a response to fears that the conflict could disrupt energy supplies.
The New York Times reported that the administration may have underestimated Iran’s likely response and the risks to global energy flows through the Persian Gulf. Oil prices surged, and shipping disruptions emerged, forcing officials to find ways to contain a potential economic shock.
Leavitt defended the administration’s handling of the energy situation, saying the decision to release reserves was consistent with Trump’s earlier statements. “President Trump previously stated that he would responsibly use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve at the right time, and that time is now,” she said.
With IANS inputs