Trump’s changing Iran strategy puts Netanyahu in a bind

The assessment came alongside separate US intelligence estimates suggesting that the time Iran would need to build a nuclear weapon has changed little since last summer. Corresponding to sources familiar with the matter, analysts believe the US-Israeli campaign may have delayed Iran’s timeline by up to a year, but did not fundamentally dismantle the program.

The findings challenge one of the central assumptions behind the war: that sustained bombardment would dramatically weaken Iran’s ability to threaten Israel in the near term. Instead, intelligence assessments now suggest Tehran has restored access to underground missile storage networks and, in some cases, resumed work on missiles that were close to completion before the conflict began.

For Israel, this matters almost as much as the nuclear issue itself. Israeli security officials increasingly argue that Iran’s ballistic missile program, rather than uranium enrichment alone, represents the more immediate strategic danger. Iran fired an estimated 650 missiles at Israel during the 40-day conflict, according to the Israeli military, and officials fear Tehran could eventually build an arsenal of 10,000 to 20,000 missiles, which would make future strikes against Iran vastly more difficult.

At the same time, the broader goals of the war appear increasingly elusive. The Iranian regime did not collapse. The expected internal uprising never materialised. The Strait of Hormuz crisis destabilised global markets more than it destabilised Tehran. And despite enormous economic pressure, Iranian leaders continue to reject key American demands.

The conflict has also generated growing criticism inside the US. Commentators and former officials warned that the war depleted American stockpiles and exposed Washington to strategic overreach, at a time when Trump is increasingly focused on China and global economic stability.

This emerging mood helps explain why Trump now appears more interested in containing the conflict and pursuing negotiations than in escalating the war further.

Throughout the early stages of the war, Netanyahu and Trump appeared closely aligned. Israeli officials described “perfect harmony and coordination” between the two leaders as they pursued joint military operations against Iran.

But according to diplomatic and intelligence sources cited by Al-Monitor, that alignment has weakened considerably in recent weeks.

Trump’s priorities now appear increasingly shaped by concerns over global markets, oil prices and the risk of a prolonged regional conflict. As he prepares for high-stakes meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the White House appears more focused on containing the crisis than escalating it further.

This shift has translated into growing frustration with Netanyahu’s approach. According to The Guardian, Trump reportedly rebuked Israel after strikes on Iran’s South Pars gasfield and publicly insisted that Israel halt further escalation in Lebanon.

More significantly, Israel increasingly appears excluded from key diplomatic discussions. Reports cited by Reuters and Al-Monitor suggest Israeli officials were surprised by the American decision to suspend military operations around the Strait of Hormuz and by the speed of emerging negotiations with Tehran.

Netanyahu has repeatedly tried to project unity, insisting he speaks with Trump almost daily and that both governments remain fully coordinated. However, the frequency of those reassurances may itself reflect growing concern inside Israel that the relationship is no longer functioning as smoothly as before.

As political consultant Dahlia Scheindlin told The Guardian, Netanyahu’s constant insistence that relations are excellent may indicate the opposite.

The core disagreement centres on the scope of a possible agreement with Iran. Trump increasingly appears willing to pursue a narrower deal focused mainly on the nuclear program, while sidelining the issues Israel considers equally vital: ballistic missiles and Iranian regional proxies.

Israeli officials fear Trump could ultimately settle for a temporary framework agreement that freezes enrichment for a limited period, while easing sanctions and postponing broader disputes into future negotiations.

That possibility has also elevated China’s role in the crisis. Haaretz columnist Zvi Bar'el argued that Trump’s Iran strategy has effectively reached a dead end, leaving the US president increasingly reliant on Xi Jinping to help stabilise the region and pressure Tehran.

According to Bar'el, this marks a striking geopolitical reversal. Rather than China depending on Washington to stabilise the Middle East, Trump now appears to need Beijing’s assistance. China remains Iran’s largest economic lifeline and one of the few powers with real leverage over Tehran through trade, oil purchases and diplomatic ties.

For Netanyahu, the implications are significant. For years, Israel argued that military pressure, rather than diplomacy, was the only effective way to confront Iran. A US pivot towards negotiations backed by Chinese mediation would represent a clear shift away from Netanyahu’s preferred strategy of sustained escalation and maximal pressure.

For Netanyahu, the Iran war was never only about security. It was also central to his domestic political strategy ahead of elections expected later this year.

According to Al-Monitor, Netanyahu hoped to frame the conflict as proof that he alone could stop Iran’s nuclear ambitions and influence Trump to take decisive military action.

That narrative is now under pressure. Iran’s missile infrastructure remains largely functional, the regime survived, and the nuclear issue remains unresolved. At the same time, Trump appears increasingly less committed to Netanyahu’s maximalist objectives.

Israeli public debate is also returning to the unresolved questions surrounding October 7, 2023 and Netanyahu’s broader leadership failures. Opposition figures are increasingly linking the uncertain outcome in Iran to wider concerns about his judgement and long-term strategy.

Even some Netanyahu associates now openly acknowledge that his influence over Trump has weakened. One associate quoted by Al-Monitor said the relationship remained good “but not as it once did”.

That matters politically because Netanyahu built much of his image around his ability to manage relations with Washington, particularly with Trump. Losing influence over the White House weakens one of his core political strengths.

If Trump ultimately reaches a deal with Iran that Israelis view as inadequate, Netanyahu could face criticism from both moderates who see the war as costly, and hardliners who believe he failed to secure decisive American backing.

Despite the tensions, neither Trump nor Netanyahu can easily detach themselves from the political legacy of the war. Although as negotiations continue and Washington’s priorities shift, the balance within the alliance increasingly appears to be changing in Trump’s favour.