Mar 17, 2026
View in browser
By Ben Johansen and Sophia Cai
Welcome to POLITICO’s West Wing Playbook: Remaking Government, your guide to Donald Trump’s unprecedented overhaul of the federal government — the key decisions, the critical characters and the power dynamics that are upending Washington and beyond.
Send tips | Subscribe | Email Sophia | Email Ben
Rep. PETE SESSIONS (R-Texas) today told CNN that U.S. Marines on Kharg Island, which handles the majority of Iran’s crude oil exports, wouldn’t count as “boots on the ground.”
“The island is not, in my opinion, boots on the ground in combat circumstances,” he said. “It would be to secure the facility.”
Sessions’ comments could offer a preview of a debate that is not far off. President DONALD TRUMP this week ordered 2,500 Marines and an amphibious assault ship to the Middle East.
But given that the idea of American troops on the ground in Iran is exceedingly unpopular, according to polls, there is a chance Republicans will try to define the term to their liking.
Because once American forces cross into Iranian territory, even in small numbers, the political and strategic calculus shifts dramatically. It signals a level of commitment, vulnerability and potential escalation that U.S. leaders, including Trump, have spent years trying to avoid, precisely because it puts American lives directly on the line in a highly visible way.
With the war in its third week, the U.S. military has conducted its campaign from afar, but with the administration hoping to secure the Strait of Hormuz, troops in Iran might be necessary.
With that comes the increased risk of casualties.
West Wing Playbook spoke with POLITICO’s Pentagon reporter PAUL McLEARY about the upcoming debate.
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Why is the term “boots on the ground” such a red line?
The campaign so far, fought with missiles that can be fired from dozens or hundreds of miles away or bombers flying at heights unreachable by air defenses, make war almost seem like a video game.
Precise, deadly, big explosions. But no visible casualties. The videos of the strikes we are being shown by the Pentagon in black and white don’t show people on the ground. But putting U.S. troops on the ground inside Iran changes that equation, and drives home that war puts Americans in grave danger, and those Americans would be vulnerable to attack.
In the current Iran context, what kinds of activities could the administration pursue while still claiming there are no boots on the ground?
The deployments of special operations forces are not publicly disclosed unlike units from the Army or Marines or Navy ships and Air Force air squadrons. So special operations forces could be inserted from submarines off the coast, by air, or over the ground at any time and the public wouldn’t know.
Are there early signs the U.S. is moving closer to that line?
The USS Tripoli and its support ships are currently moving from the South China Sea to the Middle East, and the 2,500 Marines aboard are trained in amphibious assault from the sea.
It’s not clear how they might be used — they’re also trained in civilian evacuations — but they could theoretically go ashore and establish a beachhead in order to insert artillery or air defense positions if they were tasked to. They could also be tasked with taking Kharg Island in the Persian Gulf, which the U.S. recently bombed and is Iran’s main hub for its oil exports. Either one would be an exceedingly dangerous mission.
Do special operations forces, trainers or intelligence personnel typically fall outside that definition?
Any U.S. troops currently in the region are at risk. But if we’re talking about actually being inside Iran, all of the above would obviously count. Anyone wearing a uniform or affiliated with the U.S. government is and would be a target.
How did past administrations define or stretch the term? Do you expect the current administration to spin it?
Boots on the ground means just that, so it’s difficult to spin it. In Syria, American conventional and special operations forces have been primarily focused on training Kurdish Peshmerga forces, so it has been couched as a training mission, but they still conduct combat assaults and have to defend themselves against drone and rocket attacks. So it’s training, but also combat.
Are troops in danger even though they are not in Iran?
The troops at American installations in Qatar, Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan and Kuwait are under attack from Iranian missiles and Shahed drones, so they could be considered boots on the ground.
I’ve been on seemingly safe U.S. megabases in Iraq during that war that came under rocket and mortar fire even though the bases felt big and insulated. That kind of indirect fire is very real and very deadly. So while American forces in the region may not be in Iran, 200 of them have been injured and 13 killed so far in this war, so they’re very much under fire.
MESSAGE US — West Wing Playbook is obsessively covering the Trump administration’s reshaping of the federal government. Are you a federal worker? A budget staffer? Have you picked up on any upcoming moves or policy changes? We want to hear from you on how this is playing out. Email us at westwingtips@politico.com.
Did someone forward this email to you? Subscribe!
POLITICO Policy Outlook: Powering 6G
The next generation of mobile communications technology — commonly known as 6G — promises to unlock a bold new digital future. On Wednesday, March 18, POLITICO will convene decision makers from government and industry for incisive conversations that explore what’s next for the 6G rollout — and what stands in the way. Register now to join us.
POTUS PUZZLER
How many former presidents are in the Irish American Hall of Fame?
(Answer at bottom.)
WHO’S IN, WHO’S OUT
THE IRAN DRIP: JOE KENT, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, announced today his resignation over the war in Iran — a stunning defection that shows how Trump’s decision to strike Tehran has divided some of the most loyal corners of his administration, our JOHN SAKELLARIADIS reports. “I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran,” Kent wrote in a resignation letter addressed to Trump and posted on X this morning. “Until June of 2025, you understood that the wars in the Middle East were a trap that robbed America of the precious lives of our patriots and depleted the wealth and prosperity of our nation.”
Kent did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Spokespeople for the White House and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which houses the NCTC, also did not respond.
In his letter, Kent said Iran “posed no imminent threat” to the U.S. and falsely claimed American media, high-ranking Israeli officials and influential Israeli lobbyists “deployed a misinformation campaign” and “sowed pro-war sentiments to encourage a war with Iran.”
In a post on X following Kent’s resignation, Director of National Intelligence TULSI GABBARD said Trump is “responsible for determining what is and is not an imminent threat, and whether or not to take action he deems necessary to protect the safety and security of our troops, the American people and our country.” Gabbard did not comment on whether she considers Iran an imminent threat.
Kent’s resignation comes 24 hours before the heads of the U.S. spy community, including Gabbard, are set to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Trump, in the Oval Office this afternoon, said: “It’s a good thing that he’s out, because he said that Iran was not a threat. … When somebody is working with us that says they didn’t think Iran was a threat, we don’t want those people. And there are some people I guess that would say that. But they’re not smart people or savvy people.”
POLITICO Pro
POLITICO Pro Briefings give subscribers direct access to in-depth conversations on the policy issues shaping government. Led by POLITICO reporters, these live interactive sessions go beyond the headlines to explain what’s happening, why it matters, and what’s coming next.
➡️ Get on the Invite List
In the Courts
PRO-PALESTINIAN TARGETS: Judges on a federal appeals court appeared divided today about Georgetown academic BADAR KHAN SURI’s challenge to his arrest a year ago as part of the Trump administration’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian voices, our JOSH GERSTEIN writes in.
The two Democratic appointees on the 4th Circuit panel, former President BARACK OBAMA pick PAMELA HARRIS and former President JOE BIDEN appointee DEANDREA BENJAMIN, sounded inclined to reject the Justice Department’s arguments that Congress has blocked federal district judges from hearing all disputes over decisions to detain immigrants.
But former President RONALD REAGAN appointee J. HARVIE WILKINSON said allowing district court judges to get into the middle of deportation fights risks “the specter of duplication, parallel proceedings, contradictory rulings and everything.”
Suri, who was in court today for the arguments in Richmond, Virginia, was arrested after Secretary of State MARCO RUBIO declared Suri deportable based on “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States,” primarily due to his father-in-law’s former role as a political adviser to Hamas.
Suri was released last May after a federal judge ruled that the detention of the Georgetown lecturer and postdoctoral fellow, who was studying and working in the country legally, likely violated his free speech rights.
Agenda Setting
SLIPPING AWAY: When the U.S. started firing Tomahawk missiles at Iran late last month, many Trump allies hoped it would be a quick, surgical operation, similar to last year’s strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities or the ouster of Venezuelan dictator NICOLÁS MADURO in January. Though uneasy, they were reassured by the belief that Trump’s open-ended objectives gave him the flexibility to declare victory whenever he saw fit.
Now, more than two weeks into the campaign, some of those allies believe the president no longer controls how, or when, the war ends, our MEGAN MESSERLY reports. They fear Iran’s attacks on oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, which have rattled global crude markets and threaten broader economic distress, are boxing Trump into a situation in which escalating the conflict — potentially even putting American boots on the ground — becomes the only way to credibly claim victory.
“We clearly just kicked [Iran’s] ass in the field, but, to a large extent, they hold the cards now,” said one person close to the White House, who like others in the story was granted anonymity to speak candidly about the war. “They decide how long we’re involved — and they decide if we put boots on the ground. And it doesn’t seem to me that there’s a way around that, if we want to save face.”
IN YOUR COURT: Senate Democrats sent over their latest proposal for immigration enforcement changes at the Department of Homeland Security as a shutdown of the vast department drags into its second month, our JORDAIN CARNEY and MYAH WARD report. The offer, confirmed by a White House official and two other people with direct knowledge of the matter, is the latest of several the two parties have traded since the funding lapse began Feb. 14.
The White House is “currently reviewing” the offer, the official said. But Senate Majority Leader JOHN THUNE told reporters today that the offer “didn’t change much from where we were.” He said the White House has offered to increase funding for agent body cameras to $100 million from an initial $20 million and has proposed audits from the inspector general and reviews of noncompliance.
This afternoon, the White House released a letter detailing changes it is willing to make to DHS, Myah and Jordain report. The move is the Trump administration’s attempt to show it is making a good-faith effort after Democrats derided their proposal as unserious. The White House, in five points, said it was willing to codify a number of policy changes, including an expansion of body cameras for federal immigration agents; the limit of enforcement in certain sensitive locations, including hospitals and schools’ greater oversight of DHS detention facilities; the enforcement of visible officer identification and the adherence to existing law prohibiting the deportation or detention of U.S. citizens.
“We felt like this offer is serous — that it is a good faith attempt to continue to try to come to a reasonable and expeditious conclusion to the shutdown, which we are now seeing is becoming even more disruptive on Americans’ travel plans, as well as the security mission at the department,” said a White House official granted anonymity to discuss private talks.
What We’re Reading
One reason Trump won’t give up on Putin peace deal — China (POLITICO’s Diana Nerozzi)
Israel urges Iranians to revolt but privately assesses they’ll be ‘slaughtered’ (WaPo’s John Hudson)
Republicans hope Mullin will turn the page at DHS from Noem. Democrats aren’t buying it. (POLITICO’s Eric Bazail-Eimil and Ali Bianco)
Netflix’s Chief Opens Up About Trump, YouTube and Europe (POLITICO’s Carrie Budoff Brown)
Is MAGA in its cringe era? (WaPo’s Kara Vought)
POTUS PUZZLER ANSWER
Former Presidents JOHN F. KENNEDY, Reagan and Biden are all inductees of the Irish American Hall of Fame.
Happy St. Patrick’s Day to all who celebrate! We recommend the Guinness in a boot at Dacha Beer Garden for our D.C. readers.
A CALL OUT! Do you think you have a harder trivia question? Send us your best one about the presidents, with a citation or sourcing, and we may feature it!
Edited by Ester Wells, Dan Goldberg, Jennifer Haberkorn, Kathryn A. Wolfe and Isabel Dobrin.
Follow us on X
Sophia Cai @SophiaCai99
Ben Johansen @BenJohansen3
Follow us
To change your alert settings, please log in at
https://login.politico.com/?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com/settings
This email was sent to newsletter.londoner@gmail.com by: POLITICO 1000 Wilson Blvd Arlington, VA, 22209, USA
