Trump orders renewed strikes on Iran; renaming may reset clock

President Donald Trump has directed military advisers to prepare for renewed strikes on Iran after ceasefire negotiations collapsed. The White House is considering renaming the campaign to “Operation Sledgehammer,” a move the administration says would replace the current designation and start a new 60‑day period under the War Powers Resolution.

Under the War Powers Resolution, the president may deploy U.S. forces for up to 60 days without congressional authorization; after that period lawmakers must approve the action or the president must withdraw forces. Administration lawyers argue that assigning a new operational name constitutes a new operation and thus restarts the 60‑day statutory clock. The legal stance is likely to prompt debate in Congress and could face court challenges.

Earlier strikes in June 2025, conducted under the name Operation Midnight Hammer, were intended to degrade Iran’s nuclear and military capabilities. Internal CIA assessments reviewed by U.S. officials concluded those strikes delayed Iran’s nuclear progress by roughly nine to 12 months but did not eliminate its capacity. The agency assessed that Iran has regained access to about 90% of its missile storage facilities, retains roughly 70% of its mobile launchers, and that much of its underground missile network is back online.

Planners and markets track such assessments for practical effects. Additional strikes that damage Iranian production or threaten shipping through the Strait of Hormuz could reduce available crude supply and lift global oil prices. Higher energy costs can raise operating expenses for electricity‑intensive businesses, including cryptocurrency mining operations. In past episodes of regional tension, stablecoin trading volumes in affected areas have risen as residents and firms seek alternatives for payments and settlements.

The gap between public statements about Iranian damage and internal intelligence estimates adds uncertainty for traders and institutional investors. Lawmakers critical of the administration’s approach say significant changes in military posture should receive congressional review. Supporters describe a renaming as routine command practice. Any official renaming and expansion of strikes is expected to trigger congressional hearings and potential legislation to limit or authorize further action.