How the Iran war united, and then divided Trump and Israel’s Netanyahu

How the Iran war united, and then divided Trump and Israel's Netanyahu

Israel's 'greatest friend'

How the Iran war united and then - Months before the conflict, President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shared a strong alliance. During Trump’s second term, Netanyahu was the first foreign leader to visit the White House in February 2025, a moment Trump hailed as pivotal. He praised Netanyahu for his role in relocating the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and for his opposition to the Iran nuclear deal under Barack Obama.

In October of that year, Trump received standing ovations while addressing Israel’s parliament in Jerusalem. He described Netanyahu as “one of the greatest wartime presidents,” though noted his “difficult” nature. This close partnership, however, began to fray as the Iran war escalated.

A Rift at the Crucible of Conflict

On a Sunday marking Trump’s 80th birthday, the U.S. leader was set to finalize a long-awaited agreement with Iran to extend a ceasefire and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Just hours before the deal was signed, Israeli jets launched an attack on Beirut, Lebanon, killing at least three people.

“This morning's attack on Beirut should not have happened, particularly on a special day when we are so close to a Peace Deal with Iran,” Trump stated in a Truth Social post.

Minutes later, Trump’s call with Netanyahu revealed growing frustration. According to Fox News’ Trey Yingst, the President reportedly questioned Netanyahu, saying, “What the f*** are you doing?” He later told Axios, “Why did Bibi have to do a f*****g attack? I was so pissed off. I let him know. He has no f*****g judgement.”

“Who the f*** does he think he is?”

Trump’s critique highlighted a deepening divide. The Iran war, which had initially united the leaders, became a point of contention. Netanyahu’s insistence on targeting Iran’s regime, despite Trump’s desire to end the conflict swiftly, was seen as a betrayal of their shared goal.

Political Priorities and Public Pressure

Trump had campaigned on ending “forever wars,” claiming the joint U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran would last no more than six weeks. Yet the war persisted, and with midterms approaching, he grew eager to withdraw American forces to stabilize global energy markets.

Netanyahu, meanwhile, viewed the conflict as a cornerstone of his legacy. He framed it as his “life’s work” to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, vowing for a “total victory.” During the war’s second week, he expressed pride in striking the “terrorist regime squarely in the face,” thanking Trump for his support.

But the prime minister’s political challenges loomed. An Israeli election, scheduled for October, threatened his grip on power. A perceived failure to achieve his objectives could jeopardize his re-election bid and expose him to long-standing corruption allegations.

“Netanyahu, for political reasons, can't end this war because he hasn't delivered these incredible promises, and because he doesn't want to face a reckoning with the Israeli public,” said Anshel Pfeffer, a veteran Israel correspondent for The Economist, on Thursday.

Netanyahu’s actions also raised concerns among Israelis. Thousands remain displaced due to rocket and drone attacks by Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. A majority of the population supports continuing the fight until Hezbollah is fully defeated.

A History of Tension

While Trump’s recent criticism was sharp, it echoed past tensions. Bill Clinton once remarked after meeting Netanyahu in 1996, “Who the f**k does he think he is?” President Joe Biden, in 2024, called him “a bad f*****g guy.” Yet Trump’s public rebukes were more intense than ever, starkly contrasting with a warm February meeting where their partnership seemed unshakable.

Now, as the Iran war tests their bond, the relationship between the U.S. president and Israel’s leader stands at a critical crossroads. What began as unity has evolved into discord, driven by differing priorities and mounting political pressures on both sides.