Doubt, deception and double-bluffs have been consistent keynotes over months of stalemate between the US and Iran, so only a reckless observer would venture to be sure, but it does appear a deal is emerging from the negotiations.
So, bearing in mind the caveats, what impact will that agreement have on Israeli politics and a general election set to take place by October?
After a successful 40-day military campaign against a regime Israeli widely consider to pose an existential threat, it appears to many that Donald Trump decided to stop the war prematurely.
The disappointment was not only felt in Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. Many Israelis were left dumbstruck that two of the world’s most powerful militaries didn’t finish the job.
Hundreds of strikes every day had slowly but surely crippled the regime, but few wars of this magnitude are won in just a few weeks against a regime as obdurate as the Islamic Republic.
For Netanyahu, a successful outcome would enshrine him as Israel’s modern-day Churchill. Having warned against Iran’s nuclear ambitions for decades, in 2015 he defied a sitting US President with a speech in Congress decrying Barack Obama’s JCPOA agreement as a “bad deal” with Tehran, only to persuade Donald Trump on his second time in the White House to see off their mutual enemy.
But now Netanyahu must acknowledge there is a great deal of unfinished business. Iran retains large quantities of highly enriched uranium, the regime’s ballistic missile and drone programme is being rebuilt, and a deal with the US may bring in billions of dollars.
The prime minister has accordingly switched to damage-control mode. A source familiar with the matter told the JC that on Saturday Netanyahu “initiated” a phone call with Trump “as there is heavy concern in Israel because there’s nothing in writing about the stockpile of highly enriched uranium”.
The source added: “When Israel is not in the driving seat they are left out of the equation. This is what happened [in the US-Iran talks].”
However, an Israeli official told JC that Washington is keeping Israel updated on talks over a memorandum of understanding to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, while negotiations advance toward a final agreement on the remaining disputed issues.
Of Saturday night’s call, the source said: “The prime minister told President Trump that Israel will preserve full freedom of action against threats in all arenas, including Lebanon. Trump reiterated his support for this principle. Trump also emphasised he will insist on dismantling Iran’s nuclear programme and removing all enriched uranium from its territory, and will not sign a final deal without those conditions.”
Former National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror told the JC the most important issue for Israel is “exporting all enriched uranium and not letting the Iranians resume enrichment under any circumstances”.
Without guarantees about what exactly will happen to Iran’s 400kg stockpile of 60 per cent-enriched uranium – near weapons-grade – Netanyahu will have a hard time selling an agreement to the Israel public.
Netanyahu is the great survivor of modern Israeli politics, but can even he forge electoral victory out of a potentially bad deal with Iran? A victory over the Islamic Republic would not only have secured his Churchillian legacy but also provided the game-changer to hold on to power in the Knesset. Yet the polls currently suggest Netanyahu will find himself short of a majority by eight to 12 seats.
But don’t write off the seasoned leader finding a way to spin the situation in his favour, suggests former Netanyahu adviser Aviv Bushinsky.
He told the JC: “Netanyahu will still portray himself as the best friend of Trump, and he is the only one who can talk to him and convince him to do what is needed to do for Israel and the world.
“And Trump himself said that Bibi is a great friend and he’s not treated well in Israel. So Netanyahu will try to convince Israeli people that his competitors don’t have the same direct access to Trump and that they won’t be able to reach the same kind of coordination with the US as we saw recently in the war with Iran.”
But Netanyahu will also argue that he’s the only one capable of changing the reality in the Middle East. “Just give him another chance, and he’ll finish the job.”
In the wider picture, whatever frustrations there may be over the current negotiations with Iran, Israel is in a strategically good place after more than two years of wars with its enemies have dramatically altered the map, according to Amidror (a Distinguished Fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America).
Hamas, he said, is largely “irrelevant”, surrounded by IDF forces, the threat of a cross-border invasion by Hezbollah has all but vanished, and with Bashar al-Assad gone, Syria is out of the equation as Tehran can no longer freely move weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
For Amidror, a comprehensive agreement with Iran that includes removing enriched uranium and dismantling nuclear facilities is better for Israel than war.
But the prime minister who spoke out against Obama’s JCPOA is likely to sabotage any similar new agreement and pursue a resumption of the war. The ultimately goal is not only an end to the negotiations but farewell to the Islamic Republic itself.
That scenario may currently seem unlikely, but the reward for Netanyahu would an election “landslide,” according to Bushinsky.
He said: “If the Iranian regime falls [due to a new round of war] it would be very hard not to attribute it to Netanyahu. But if a comprehensive [nuclear] agreement is reached, it will be very hard for Netanyahu to say it’s a bad deal, like he did with Obama. But it won’t necessarily be the thing that topples him.”
Bushinsky points to other factors: “Netanyahu’s headache will be mainly with the draft law and his responsibility for the October 7 massacre.”
The war with Iran brought rare unity to the corridors of the Knesset. Most opposition politicians threw their support behind the campaign. Who could dare criticise embarking on a joint war with the most powerful nation on Earth against Israel’s mortal enemy? Iran’s fingerprints were all over both the October 7 massacre and Hezbollah’s decision to enter the war against Israel the following day.
But some opposition politicians are brutally frank in their criticism of Netanyahu’s war. Former IDF deputy chief Yair Golan, leader of the Democrats (the merged Labour and Meretz parties), is scathing: “Netanyahu is incapable of bringing Israel real security. For over two and a half years, he has been opening fronts and not achieving victories that would ensure our long-term security.”
Golan believes the prime minister missed an opportunity after the opening rounds of the Iran war: “After Khamenei, we could have subdued Iran through diplomatic initiatives, but he chose to continue the campaign, lost momentum, and now negotiations are under way with Israeli interests not necessarily on the table.”
He insists a change of government is imperative: “What has become evident over the past three years is the lack of strategy. Israel should seek a decisive outcome that brings security and stability to Israel and the region, not prepare for a next round of conflict or for never-ending conflict. That will require new leadership in Israel, because the current leadership has proved itself incapable of doing so.”
Meanwhile, the electoral calculus is further complicated by the fact that Israel is not the only ally in the region attempting to shape Trump’s decisions.
The Gulf states were hit with thousands of missiles and drones from Iran during the war, targeting civilian infrastructure, including the economic lifeblood of their oil and energy sites.
Israel has become hardened to enduring huge losses to survive since 1948, but these kingdoms have been left deeply troubled by the daily bombardment.
A political consultant in Bahrain, Ahmed Khuzaie, told the JC that the trauma from the war with Iran “should logically” push the Gulf nations toward escalation, “even regime change in Tehran. Yet what we see instead is a cycle of mixed signals.”
Khuzaie points to the conflicting reports throughout the war: some said the Gulf states asked the US to stop the fighting. Others suggested they advocated for Washington to continue.
“And today, we hear that those same Gulf states asked Trump to postpone the war… This Reflexive Strategy is designed to keep multiple audiences guessing, to maintain leverage in negotiations, and to prevent Iran from fully anticipating Gulf intentions.
“It is also aimed at Trump himself: by alternating between calls for war, calls for peace, and demonstrations of independent action, the Gulf states are trying to shape his calculus – pushing him toward a deal that secures their safety without plunging them into another devastating conflict.”
How would the Gulf states react now talks break down and war resumes? The Bahraini analyst said: “All the Gulf nations would almost certainly end up joining Israel and the US in striking back.
“The reason is straightforward: the Gulf states have now experienced the scale of Iran’s threat directly, with hundreds of ballistic missiles and drones raining down on them. That kind of assault leaves little room for ambiguity – it transforms Iran from a distant adversary into an immediate existential danger.”
All of which means that, while Netanyahu may currently appear sidelined in Washington’s handling of the Iran conflict, a lot can happen before the election that is likely to take place in September or October.
That is an eternity away, in the scale of Israeli politics.
And if there is one politician capable of turning the tide to his advantage, it is Netanyahu.
To get more Israel news, click here to sign up for our free Israel Briefing newsletter.