Netanyahu and Trump's real plans in Iran

JerusalemThe open conflict between Israel, the United States, and Iran has highlighted not only the military capabilities of each actor but also the divergences in their strategies and objectives. Although the Israeli and American offensives share common goals, what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is truly seeking is not exactly the same as what US President Donald Trump is pursuing.

As early as 2000, Netanyahu warned in public speeches that Iran would eventually acquire nuclear weapons if it wasn't stopped. For more than two decades, the Iranian issue has been a constant, almost an obsession, in his political career. For him, the 2026 war is the culmination of this strategic approach: to definitively prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon and eliminate its capacity to produce ballistic missiles capable of threatening Israel.

“Israel wants to prevent Iran from producing nuclear weapons or ballistic missiles that could endanger it,” Yehuda Weinraub, former spokesman and senior officer of the Israel Defense Forces, told ARA. “But it’s important to understand that the ultimate goal is to prevent the regime from falling into the hands of other leaders with similar ideologies. Israel wants to see a complete regime change, since the current one has vowed to destroy Israel and does not recognize the existence of the Jewish state.” From his perspective, the war against Iran stems from the need to eliminate a direct existential threat. But it goes beyond immediate security.

In this sense, for the Israeli prime minister, the war is not only a matter of security, but also an opportunity to weaken a historical enemy, dismantle its military and nuclear power, reduce its ability to finance groups like Hezbollah or Hamas, and at the same time, strengthen his internal position before the next elections scheduled for October.

Gain popularity

Following the attacks of October 7, 2023, all polls indicated that his coalition could lose its parliamentary majority. His popularity initially plummeted, but rebounded with the Israeli army's military successes against Hezbollah in Lebanon. However, this rebound was not enough to guarantee him a clear victory in any eventual elections.

If the offensive against Iran succeeds in seriously damaging Iran's ballistic missile program or even paves the way for regime change, Netanyahu could emerge politically strengthened. So far, on the third day of the war, he appears to have garnered almost unconditional support from Israeli society and a significant portion of the political spectrum in the fight against Tehran.

Trump shares part of the diagnosis: he doesn't want a nuclear Iran or one with ballistic missile capabilities that would destabilize the region. But officially, Washington maintains that political transformation must come from the Iranian people.

The US position

Unlike Netanyahu, Trump's priority has been to present the conflict as an operation to eliminate immediate threats to American interests and, in his view, improve the nuclear agreement signed by former President Barack Obama. He has framed the war as a means to protect the United States and its influence in the region.

"The United States also does not accept Iran becoming a nuclear power, as this would be a danger not only to the Middle East and its allies, but to the world order," Weinraub adds. "With Israel, there is a very close convergence, but not absolute congruence. The objectives are very similar, but not identical. Israel wants the fall of the current regime for strategic and existential reasons, while the US seeks to eliminate immediate threats and leaves the initiative for regime change in the hands of the Iranians."

This difference is significant. While Israel is prepared for a more aggressive offensive, Washington adopts a more restrained approach, viewing the conflict as a limited and strictly strategic operation. Furthermore, American public opinion is notably more averse than Israeli public opinion: according to a recent University of Maryland poll, only 21% of US citizens support open war against Iran.

"If the war drags on and there are more casualties, American public opinion could blame Trump for a conflict he didn't want. The United States has already had difficult experiences with wars like Vietnam and Afghanistan, and they wouldn't want to see the country embroiled in another prolonged conflict," the expert concludes.

The decision to delay the formal start of the offensive and maintain rounds of negotiations with Tehran until the last minute likely stemmed from the more complex calculations Washington faced. For Israel, however, the war was considered necessary to guarantee its survival as a state.