Jerusalem —
When Israeli and American warplanes simultaneously attacked Iran on February 28, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised each other’s “historic decision.” Prime Minister Netanyahu told Israelis that the alliance between the two countries has never been closer.
Three months later, what began as a joint military operation appears to be winding down as a US-led diplomatic process with Netanyahu largely sidelined.
Although the Israeli prime minister has refrained from publicly criticizing President Trump, behind closed doors he has acknowledged that Israel has limited influence over the outcome of U.S.-Iranian negotiations to end the war, Israeli officials say.
Since the first ceasefire was announced in April, Netanyahu has repeatedly pressed President Trump to resume full-scale military operations, arguing that continued pressure could still lead to the collapse of the Iranian regime. But the White House appears to have moved in the opposite direction.
The prime minister is concerned that while the deal would ease economic pressure on Iran, it would leave Israel’s core concerns, such as Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, ballistic missile program and regional proxy network, largely unaddressed, the people said.
“There is great concern that President Trump will settle for a poor interim deal,” an Israeli official told CNN. “If it’s an agreement to actually remove the uranium, that’s fine. But if it’s just a gesture, Iran could end up playing America’s side and not be able to remove the uranium.”
Iran has repeatedly said the fate of its near-weapons-grade uranium stockpile is not part of the interim agreement being negotiated. President Trump has said the material should eventually be removed from Iran and transferred to the United States, but he has recently shown flexibility on the issue. U.S. and Israeli officials fear it could give Iran a path to nuclear weapons.
According to the official, Prime Minister Netanyahu is pushing for attacks on Iranian oil facilities to accelerate the fall of his regime.
“If the (US) blockade (of Iranian ports) is lifted, especially if it was part of a bad deal, it would be a very bad thing and would significantly strengthen the regime,” the official said. “Instead of forcing soldiers and police into a situation where they can’t pay their salaries, we will inject money to help fund the recovery.”
Another Israeli source put it more bluntly: “This is what it felt like when President Trump threw us under the bus,” a source told CNN.
Another big problem is Lebanon. Iran has reportedly called for a ceasefire in Lebanon to be included in the deal, where the US has already reined in Israeli actions while Hezbollah has stepped up drone attacks on Israeli forces and northern border areas.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has in recent days directed Israeli forces to expand operations in Lebanon, insisting that Israel has freedom to operate there and will continue to act against any threats.
But U.S. limitations have increased pressure on Netanyahu from both political opponents and members of his coalition. Netanyahu’s far-right political allies, Ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, have both called for a more aggressive military response.
Ben Gvir urged Netanyahu to confront Trump and “make it clear that the state of Israel cannot tolerate this.”
Despite Israel’s dissatisfaction with the new deal, its relatively subdued reaction stands in stark contrast to Netanyahu’s fierce campaign against the 2015 Iran nuclear deal signed by former President Barack Obama. The effort culminated in a controversial parliamentary speech in which the prime minister claimed the deal was a historic mistake. For President Trump, that option is not an option.
Prime Minister Netanyahu has poured much of his political capital into his relationship with President Trump. Challenging him publicly could carry even greater political risks, especially with elections looming.
Sources said Netanyahu instead laid the blame at the feet of U.S. negotiators Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, who steered the president toward an end to hostilities. Pro-Prime Minister Netanyahu media outlets have attacked the negotiating team and distanced the prime minister from criticism.
“Mr. Kushner, Mr. Witkoff and Mr. Vance have chosen the economic world over the existential world,” Yaakov Bardugo, a television anchor considered very close to the prime minister, said this week on pro-Netanyahu Channel 14. “I respect the deal they’re making, but we’re the ones living here.”
But people familiar with U.S.-Israel talks said the rift reflected a deep misunderstanding on the Israeli side.
“The Israelis were so intent on regime change in Iran that they did not fully realize that this war could lead to regime change in Washington, D.C.,” the official said. President Trump has moved to reassert control, recognizing that the narrative that Israel is drawing the United States into a major Middle East war is politically harmful, the person added.
“President Trump realized that the ‘wag the dog Bibi’ rhetoric was killing him, so he had to show that he had the power to decide,” he said, using Netanyahu’s nickname.
Trump himself seemed to make that point last week.
“Bibi is a good guy, he does everything I tell him to do,” he said.
This is not the first time President Trump has abruptly ended Netanyahu’s war. In Gaza, Iran, and Lebanon, it was Trump who called for a timeout. Even though Israel’s longest-serving leader wanted the war to continue, President Trump pushed Netanyahu’s hand.
Those who have worked closely with the Israeli prime minister over the years describe what they see as a consistent pattern. “Prime Minister Netanyahu has no idea when to stop and cut (his losses),” one such person said.
Critics accuse him of failing to translate tactical and operational military successes into strategic gains. “Prime Minister Netanyahu has a major strategic weakness: a lack of will or ability to make difficult decisions to supplement military action,” said a former Israeli security official. “That is why Israel’s strategic position has not improved, but rather deteriorated. Iran’s regime remains, its nuclear program is unresolved, and regional organizations, including Hezbollah and Hamas, are still active.”
The outcome of the war could also complicate the prime minister’s political narrative ahead of the upcoming elections.
The Iran operation was supposed to be a central pillar in his efforts to rebuild his legacy after Hamas’ attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and he planned to sell his vision of a transformed Middle East.
A recent poll by the Israel National Security Institute found that 45% of Israelis believe the situation with Iran is worse than it was before October 7, while 31% think it has improved. According to the poll, almost half of respondents believe that Israel probably cannot win or has already lost a war with Iran, but only 41% are optimistic that Israel will win.
Israeli officials believe that President Trump is pressuring Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states to normalize relations with Israel and extend the Abraham Accords as a form of political compensation. But they remain skeptical of a real breakthrough, given Saudi Arabia’s desire for a credible path to a Palestinian state and the constraints imposed by Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition.
Trump could offer Netanyahu further political compensation ahead of the campaign, one of the sources said, in the form of a presidential visit, a statement of support or a defense deal that would signal a strong alliance between the two countries.
But the implications could go deeper than the immediate election cycle and reach into the central narrative of Netanyahu’s political career. For more than three decades, he has defined himself as a leader who confronts Iran’s nuclear ambitions through sustained pressure, military force, and close coordination with Washington.
“It is hard to overstate how deeply Prime Minister Netanyahu views this moment as a potential personal and political defeat,” said Danny Sitrinowicz, a senior researcher at INSS.
Prime Minister Netanyahu has built a political identity around being “Mr. Iran,” a leader who claims only force can stop the regime, he wrote in X. After what Mr. Sitrinovich described as “multiple operational successes and one major strategic failure,” Netanyahu may be forced to accept a deal that “not only legitimizes the very regime he sought to undermine, but also exposes the collapse of his long-standing Iranian doctrine.”
