The Uneasy Alliance: When Netanyahu Feared a Trump-Iran Nuclear Deal

It's a delicate dance, isn't it? The relationship between close allies, especially when their perceived strategic interests diverge. Back in 2019, a particularly intriguing — and, frankly, quite tense — situation unfolded between Washington and Jerusalem. Reports surfaced, based on insights from a prominent Israeli security expert, that then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quietly, but deeply, concerned about the possibility of then-U.S. President Donald Trump cutting a new deal with Iran.

Now, this might seem a little counterintuitive at first glance. After all, Trump had famously pulled the United States out of the Obama-era nuclear agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), a move that Netanyahu had vocally championed. So, why the unease now? The crux of the matter, according to Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, was less about a deal and more about Trump’s deal. Netanyahu, it seemed, was wary of a transactional approach that might, inadvertently or otherwise, legitimize Iran's nuclear program in a way that Israel found unacceptable.

One might recall Trump’s foreign policy often operating on a distinct principle: a desire to make 'deals.' And while he had certainly ratcheted up the 'maximum pressure' campaign against Tehran—something Israel largely favored—there was always that underlying possibility, that persistent rumor, that he might just as quickly pivot to the negotiating table. For Netanyahu, this wasn't just hypothetical; it represented a genuine strategic threat. A quick, perhaps less thoroughly vetted, agreement could very well unravel years of effort to contain Iran's ambitions, leaving Israel in a more precarious position.

The fear wasn't without precedent. Yadlin pointed out that Trump, in his eagerness for a 'win' or a 'deal,' might offer concessions that Israel considered dangerous. Unlike the detailed, multi-party negotiations that led to the JCPOA, there was a sense that a Trump-brokered agreement could be more impulsive, more focused on a swift handshake than on long-term, verifiable security guarantees. This prospect, for a nation like Israel that views Iran's nuclear program as an existential threat, was simply unacceptable. They preferred the continued application of overwhelming pressure, hoping for a collapse of the regime or a more favorable long-term resolution, rather than a potentially flimsy pact.

The whole situation painted a fascinating picture of the complexities inherent in international relations. Here were two close allies, ostensibly on the same page regarding Iran's dangers, yet with subtly different strategies and deep-seated anxieties about the path forward. For Netanyahu, navigating Trump's unpredictable foreign policy, especially on an issue as vital as national security, must have felt like walking a tightrope. It underscores that even the closest friendships between nations can be fraught with underlying tensions and differing calculations, particularly when the stakes are so incredibly high.