In light of the agreement between Iran and America, a worrying reading is rising in Israel that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has begun to lose US President Donald Trump, without having an alternative plan, after the war on Iran turned from a path that was supposed to be easy into a complex crisis that prompted Washington to search for a quick way out.
According to a report by journalist Itamar Eichner, on the Israeli website Ynet, Trump believed, perhaps based on what he heard from Netanyahu and Mossad chief Dadi Barnea during their meeting at the White House, that war with Iran would be like a “walk in the park,” but he later discovered that this was not the case, just as senior officials in his administration had warned.
The report indicated that in the days before the outbreak of war, Trump tended to value Netanyahu, although officials in the US administration believed from the beginning that the scene was more complex. But the US President decided at the time to follow Netanyahu’s estimates, before later discovering the extent of the complexity.
Under the title of the agreement with Iran, the report included headlines related to the scene, including the Iranian army’s threat that Israel should expect a harsh response if it continues the attack in southern Lebanon, and the revelation of what it described as the “secret document” that includes the text of the memorandum of understanding between America and Iran, in addition to the American intelligence’s warning of “a weapon more powerful than any nuclear weapon” and the great concession that Iran will obtain immediately, arriving at a conclusion that the report described as bleak for the end of the war, which is that the Gulf states are paying “brotherhood” to Iran.
During the war, after exchanging major blows, Iran did not surrender, but rather closed the Strait of Hormuz and shook the entire world. At this point, the American President understood that things were getting complicated, so he decided to reduce losses and push towards ending the war. According to the report, Trump has been trying for a long time to end the war, and among his attempts was to use threats against the Iranians, but they did not take him seriously.
As for what happened later, when Israel attacked Beirut, it was read to Americans as “spitting in Trump’s face.” From Washington’s point of view, America entered the war alongside its partner, then discovered that Netanyahu was working behind the scenes to bring down the negotiations. The report quoted informed Israeli sources as saying that Trump himself thought this way, as did people in his circle.
The report confirms that the US President supports Israel and believes that without him it would not have survived, but he considered that the attack in Beirut was a maneuver that reflects ungratefulness. An informed source was quoted as saying: “He understood that Bibi’s vision was not his vision. Bibi wanted something else. Bibi did not want to end the war. He did not want an agreement. He wanted to return to bombing.”
In this context, the report quoted a prominent headline stating that Trump said he told Netanyahu that he was “completely crazy,” a reference contained in material attributed to Pod Force One and the New York Post.
According to the report, the US President then decided to direct a political blow at Netanyahu, by saying that he was not sure that the Israeli Prime Minister would run in the upcoming elections, a phrase that is read in the political code as a signal to the door. Also, according to the report, was the insulting statement that Trump said today, when he announced that he had proposed to Syria to address the Hezbollah file.
In Trump’s reading, as presented in the report, the situation in which Hezbollah is firing towards northern towns is considered normal and does not require a response, as long as no one is injured. In addition, Trump said that changing the regime in Iran was never a goal, considering that the current regime is acting rationally.
Trump seems to assume that Netanyahu’s hands are tied and that he is unable to respond. He knows, according to the report, that Netanyahu has no alternative or support in America, and that he is practically in his pocket. Netanyahu also realizes this, and knows that he cannot cut the rope, but he is approaching a moment in which there will be no escape from confronting Trump or trying to address his heart.
In parallel, other headlines related to the Israeli political scene were included in the text, including that senior officials in Likud “fear for their positions” and stand behind the idea of canceling the primary elections, and the attack by the President of Belarus under the title “Holocaust? Wiping everything off the face of the Earth” and Israel’s response to it, in addition to a live broadcast of the Knesset session to vote on granting immunity to Representative Tali Gottlieb.
In this sense, the dispute does not stop at the borders of a tactical discrepancy between Washington and Tel Aviv, but rather touches on a deeper testing moment in the Trump-Netanyahu relationship, as Beirut, according to the same Israeli reading, has transformed from the arena of a military strike into the subject of a crisis of confidence that may open the door to a political confrontation that both parties do not want, but are approaching.
