War in Iran: how the conflict revealed the fractures between Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu

Between Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, the stars no longer seem aligned. The two men allied in the war against Iran are now pursuing very distinct, even contradictory, objectives. In the midst of a period of negotiations between the Islamic Republic and the United States, tensions between Israel and Iran have been exacerbated after strikes in Lebanon against Hezbollah, an ally of Iranian power.

Iran responded by launching ballistic missiles against Israel, ending an already fragile truce. Donald Trump immediately called Benjamin Netanyahu to ask him not to respond militarily and to give the ongoing negotiations with Tehran a chance. A request remained a dead letter. The Israeli Prime Minister authorized strikes on Iranian territory, angering Donald Trump.

The latter publicly affirmed that it was he who was leading the negotiations and that the Israeli Prime Minister would have “no choice” to accept an agreement concluded by Washington, during a telephone interview with Financial Times. “It’s me who’s calling the shots. It’s me who’s calling the shots. It’s not him who’s calling the shots,” he repeated.

Two allies with different objectives

When the United States and Israel together launched their first strikes against Iran on February 28, 2026, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu seemed more aligned than ever. The two leaders then presented a common vision: strike Iranian military capabilities, destroy infrastructure linked to the nuclear program and lastingly weaken the Islamic Republic. Convincing Trump to participate in the operation was one of the Israeli Prime Minister’s greatest diplomatic victories, underlinesThe Guardian.

This unity actually hid two different conceptions of war. For Netanyahu, the strikes were not only intended to degrade Iranian military capabilities. They were to open the way to a lasting transformation of the Iranian regime. From the first weeks of the conflict, experts reported that the Israeli Prime Minister saw in Tehran’s military weakening a historic opportunity to bring about the fall of the mullahs’ regime.

Donald Trump approached the war with a different logic. Its main objective was to force Iran to accept a new agreement under military pressure. The strikes were intended to create a balance of power favorable to Washington, not serve as a prelude to a long war or an operation to overthrow the regime. As early as March, his administration began exploring avenues for negotiation with Tehran, including on nuclear power and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

A turning point during peace negotiations

A turning point in the Israeli-American relationship came in the spring, when Washington began actively negotiating a ceasefire and a broader agreement with Tehran. This orientation caused growing irritation in Jerusalem. In Netanyahu’s eyes, the United States risked interrupting the military campaign just when Iran seemed most vulnerable.

The two allies are now pursuing distinct objectives: Trump seeks to end the war, while Netanyahu wants to exploit military gains to sustainably reshape the regional balance. The two men are divided on the definition of victory. For Trump, victory consists of obtaining a favorable agreement after having demonstrated American power.

For Netanyahu, victory assumes that Iran emerges permanently weakened, or even transformed politically, so that it can no longer represent a strategic threat to Israel. The war began thanks to unprecedented military cooperation between the two allies; it now continues in a context of growing disagreement.