Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has threatened to launch strikes against Iran's primary nuclear enrichment facilities while President Donald Trump attempts to negotiate a nuclear agreement with Tehran, according to officials familiar with the discussions.
The disagreement over the most effective approach to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons has resulted in at least one heated telephone conversation between Trump and Netanyahu, along with numerous high-level meetings between American and Israeli officials in recent days, The New York Times reported.
Trump stated Sunday that "something good" might emerge from his efforts to restrict Iran's nuclear program within the "next two days," The New York Times reported.
Sources knowledgeable about the negotiations indicated that at most, there would be an announcement of shared principles, according to The New York Times. The specifics under consideration remain confidential and would likely establish groundwork for additional negotiations, beginning with whether Iran could continue uranium enrichment at any level and how it would reduce its stockpiles of near-weapons-grade material.
The New York Times revealed in April that Israel had planned to attack Iranian nuclear installations as early as this month but was deterred by Trump, who preferred continued negotiations with Tehran. Netanyahu has persistently advocated for military action without US support, The New York Times reported.
Israel does not participate in the negotiations between America and Iran, The New York Times noted. The core tension between Netanyahu and Trump stems from their contrasting views on how to capitalize on Iran's current vulnerability.
In October, Israel eliminated crucial components of Iran's strategic air defense system that protected the nation's nuclear facilities, The New York Times reported. This would allow Israeli aircraft to approach Iran's borders without fear of being targeted.
Israel has also weakened Hezbollah and Hamas, which receive Iranian funding, weapons and rockets, according to The New York Times. By damaging Hezbollah particularly, Israel eliminated concerns about the group threatening Israeli aircraft en route to Iran and retaliating with missile attacks following any strike.
Netanyahu has contended that Iran's weakness will not persist, making this the optimal time for an attack, The New York Times reported. Trump has argued that Iran's weakness creates an ideal opportunity to negotiate an end to Iran's enrichment program, supported by the threat of military action if discussions fail.
Israeli officials worry that Trump is so determined to secure his own agreement – one he will attempt to present as stronger than the Obama administration's 2015 deal – that he will permit Iran to maintain its uranium enrichment facilities, The New York Times reported.
Last month, Netanyahu insisted that the only "good deal" would dismantle "all of the infrastructure" of Iran's extensive nuclear facilities, which are buried beneath the desert in Natanz, deep within a mountain at Fordow, and at installations throughout the country, according to The New York Times.
This account of tensions between the two leaders derives from interviews with US, European and Israeli officials involved in the diplomacy and debate between the American and Israeli governments, The New York Times reported. They requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss sensitive diplomacy.
Ron Dermer, Israel's minister of strategic affairs, and David Barnea, head of Israel's Mossad intelligence agency, met in Rome Friday with Trump's chief negotiator Steve Witkoff, The New York Times reported.
The two officials then traveled to Washington for a Monday meeting with CIA Director John Ratcliffe, according to The New York Times. Dermer met again with Witkoff Tuesday, though the purpose of that meeting remained unclear.
When asked for comment, White House officials referenced Trump's weekend remarks, when he said he would "love to see no bombs dropped," The New York Times reported.
The primary disagreement in negotiations between Witkoff and his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi centers on the Trump administration's position that Iran must cease all nuclear material enrichment on its territory, according to The New York Times. Araghchi has repeatedly rejected this restriction, reiterating in a Tuesday social media post that if Western powers insist on "'zero enrichment' in Iran" then "there is nothing left for us to discuss on the nuclear issue," The New York Times reported.
To prevent negotiations from collapsing, Witkoff and Oman, serving as mediator, are exploring creative alternatives, The New York Times reported. These include a possible regional joint venture to produce nuclear reactor fuel involving Iran, Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations, plus some US participation. However, the location of actual enrichment remains undetermined.
Witkoff has also abandoned his initial objections to an interim understanding outlining principles for a final deal, according to The New York Times. But this may not satisfy Israel or congressional Iran hawks.
This approach resembles what the Obama administration did in 2013, though completing a final arrangement took two additional years, The New York Times noted. Trump campaigned against that agreement during his 2016 presidential run, calling it a "disaster" because it allowed Iran to continue low-level enrichment and expired completely in 2030.
Trump withdrew from the agreement in 2018 and reimposed economic sanctions on Iran, The New York Times reported.
Over the past four years, Iranians have not only revived and improved their nuclear facilities but also produced uranium enriched to 60% purity, just below "bomb grade" levels, according to The New York Times. Converting this to 90% enriched fuel for a bomb would take several weeks, and producing an actual nuclear weapon would require somewhere between several months to a year, American intelligence officials have estimated.
Ratcliffe traveled to Israel last month to discuss possible covert actions against Iran with Netanyahu and Israeli intelligence officials, The New York Times reported. The two countries have previously cooperated on covert efforts to cripple Iran's uranium enrichment capabilities, including an effort during the Bush and Obama administrations to attack facilities with sophisticated cyber weapons.
Throughout his decades in government, Netanyahu has consistently been skeptical of diplomatic overtures to Tehran, The New York Times noted. He opposed and sought to derail the 2015 agreement, even addressing a joint congressional session to argue for killing it.
This time, Israeli officials have revived an old strategy: threatening to strike Iran without American assistance, The New York Times reported. They insist they are not bluffing, despite making such threats and retreating multiple times over nearly two decades.
Israeli officials signaled to the Trump administration shortly before Trump's first formal foreign trip to the Middle East this month that they were preparing to attack Iran's nuclear sites, according to two people briefed on the discussions and cited by The New York Times. US intelligence also detected Israel's strike preparations.
This prompted Trump to speak with Netanyahu, who did not deny ordering his military and intelligence agencies to prepare for a strike and argued he had a limited window for action, The New York Times reported.
However, US military officials remain skeptical about how effective an Israeli strike conducted without American support would be, according to The New York Times. During the call, Trump acknowledged Iran's weakness but said this gave America leverage to make a deal ending the nuclear program peacefully, officials recounted to The New York Times.
Israelis are particularly suspicious of any interim deal that might keep Iran's facilities operational for months or years while reaching a final agreement, The New York Times reported. Initially, the Trump administration was also skeptical. Witkoff told his Iranian counterpart that Trump wanted a final deal within approximately two months.
But that deadline is approaching expiration, and a major gap remains over whether Iran will be permitted to continue uranium enrichment, which Tehran claims as its right as a Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty signatory, according to The New York Times.
Now, the Trump administration appears more receptive to some interim declaration of common principles because it could help prevent an Israeli strike, The New York Times reported.
To satisfy Israelis and congressional Iran hawks, experts say any interim deal would almost certainly require Iran to ship its near-bomb-grade fuel out of the country or "down blend" it to far lower levels, according to The New York Times. This would enable Trump to claim he had eliminated, at least temporarily, the threat of Iran rapidly advancing toward a weapon.
One concern for American officials is that Israel could decide to strike Iran with minimal warning, The New York Times reported. US intelligence has estimated Israel could prepare to mount an Iran attack in as little as seven hours, leaving insufficient time to pressure Netanyahu into canceling it.
But the same American military assessment questioned how effective a unilateral Israeli strike would be without American support, according to The New York Times. Some Israeli officials close to Netanyahu believe America would have no choice but to assist Israel militarily if Iran counterattacked.
Israeli officials have told their American counterparts that Netanyahu could order an Iran strike even if a successful diplomatic agreement is reached, The New York Times reported.
After his April White House meeting with Trump, Netanyahu ordered Israeli national security officials to continue planning for an Iran strike, including a smaller operation not requiring US assistance, according to multiple people briefed on the matter and cited by The New York Times. Israel already maintains numerous different plans, ranging from surgical strikes to days of bombing Iranian facilities, including some in populated cities.
