When Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu arrived at the White House on April 7th, he had a clear mission: reverse a damaging 17% tariff on Israeli goods, warn against Turkish influence in Syria, and push President Donald Trump toward military action against Iran’s nuclear program.
Instead, Netanyahu found himself outmaneuvered and sidelined. Tariffs remained. Trump praised Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. And, most stunningly, the U.S. announced it would begin direct talks with Iran—the very regime Netanyahu had hoped to bomb.
“Trump gave Netanyahu a red line,” an Israeli source close to the meeting told New Daily Prime. “Don’t do anything to mess this up.”
A Fragile Alliance Under Pressure
Israel has felt emboldened in recent months. Following Iran’s October missile strike, Israel launched a successful counterstrike, damaging key Iranian air defenses. Many inside Israel’s security establishment believe Iran is at its most vulnerable in years. And unlike in previous moments, Netanyahu seems less hesitant to strike—if not for Trump’s warning.
“He’s shackled Israel’s foreign policy to Trump,” said one Israeli diplomat. “Now, he can’t act independently, even when it counts.”
The new U.S.-Iran talks, scheduled to begin April 12th in Oman, will be mediated initially through Omani channels. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will lead the Iranian delegation, while Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, will represent the U.S. The setting may be quiet, but the stakes are anything but.
Nuclear Urgency and Competing Visions
Since Trump withdrew from the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal, Iran has enriched uranium to 60% purity—dangerously close to weapons-grade. The International Atomic Energy Agency reported in February that Iran holds enough enriched uranium for six nuclear bombs, should it decide to push further.
That has shortened Iran’s nuclear “breakout time” to mere days.
The Trump administration is split on how to respond. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz wants a deal that fully dismantles Iran’s nuclear program—a scenario Netanyahu favors, likening it to the 2003 Libyan model. But to Iran, that precedent is toxic: Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi gave up his nuclear ambitions, only to be overthrown and killed years later.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei views the nuclear program as a vital insurance policy. He may consider halting enrichment, but not destroying infrastructure—a red line for hardliners in both Tehran and Washington.
Trump’s Realpolitik: Isolation Over Confrontation
In contrast to Waltz and Netanyahu, Steve Witkoff—Trump’s envoy and a key figure in shaping the negotiations—has floated a more pragmatic goal: a robust verification system to ensure Iran isn’t weaponizing its nuclear program.
In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Witkoff suggested a softer approach could gain broader support, including from isolationist Republicans. Carlson himself posted on X: “Anyone advocating for conflict with Iran is not an ally of the United States, but an enemy.”
Trump’s instincts seem to favor a deal over war. But any agreement will require concessions—such as lifting sanctions on Iranian oil, allowing it to re-enter global markets.
Iran will also seek assurances of durability, wary of a repeat withdrawal under another U.S. administration. But turning the deal into a Senate-ratified treaty—which would require 67 votes—appears unlikely.
Clock Ticking, Stakes Rising
Time is not on anyone’s side. American, Israeli, and Arab officials told New Daily Prime that Trump would only commit a few months to negotiations. For comparison, the original JCPOA took two years to finalize.
Complicating matters is the ongoing U.S. military buildup in the region, intended as a show of force. But such posturing cannot be sustained indefinitely. A premature withdrawal risks emboldening Iran—or prompting Israel to act alone.
The dynamic echoes Trump’s faltering diplomacy with Russia. Talks launched in February to resolve the Ukraine conflict have since stalled, with Vladimir Putin proving far tougher than anticipated. A similar breakdown with Iran could prompt a rapid unraveling of Trump’s Middle East strategy.
Netanyahu Waits—and Watches
For now, Netanyahu is stuck. His meeting with Trump did not yield results, but the Israeli leader may still have allies in Congress willing to resist a perceived “JCPOA-lite” deal.
“If the Iran talks fail,” one regional official said, “Trump might circle back to Netanyahu. But if they succeed, Netanyahu is the odd man out.”
And that, for a leader who has spent decades aligning Israel’s fate with U.S. foreign policy, is an unfamiliar and increasingly uncomfortable position.
Trump’s decision to engage Iran—despite warnings from Israel—is a geopolitical gamble with high stakes. Whether it results in diplomacy, confrontation, or collapse remains uncertain. What is clear: Netanyahu’s influence in Washington has rarely felt more precarious.
