Trump and Netanyahu: What's Behind the Angry Phone Call?

What's Behind the Angry Phone Call?

 Trump and Netanyahu: What's Behind the Angry Phone Call?

At a sensitive moment in the region, the flames of tension have spread from Gaza to Tehran, but this time they have struck a different depth: the personal and strategic relationship between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The two men, who built what appeared to be a solid personal and political alliance during Trump's first term, now stand on opposite banks of a river of deep disagreements. A phone call described as a "silent explosion" revealed an unprecedented shift in the dynamics of coordination between the two allies and reshaped the equation of "who leads whom?" in the US-Israeli relationship.

The message that confused Tel Aviv: Don't escalate, we are negotiating.

According to the Israeli Walla news website, US President Donald Trump's call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was not routine; rather, it was strongly worded and direct. Trump, according to leaks, explicitly asked Netanyahu to "refrain from taking steps that could derail the negotiation process with Iran," stressing that Washington seeks a "comprehensive diplomatic solution," without ruling out any other options.

The message was not limited to Iran. Meanwhile, a diplomatic source revealed to Sky News Arabia that the White House is working to formulate a hostage deal that includes a ceasefire in Gaza, as part of an American effort to achieve a political achievement that reflects Trump's ability to manage crises without getting involved in open wars.

 However, this approach directly clashed with Netanyahu's security assessment, which insists that the return of the hostages cannot be achieved without "achieving a comprehensive military victory." This prompted him to expand the scope of operations, mobilize more than 450,000 reserve soldiers, and prepare an expanded military plan, a clear indication of his intention to escalate rather than de-escalate.

In his interview, Mark Kimmitt, a prominent figure in the American military and diplomatic establishment, accurately mapped the divergent views between Trump and Netanyahu, considering what is happening not a passing disagreement, but rather a clash of visions between "a man who believes in deals" and another who "believes in deterrence through force."

 "Netanyahu is a difficult man to deal with...and he is convinced that he knows Israel's interests better than anyone else," Kimmitt said. "Trump, by contrast, does not see wars as a solution, but rather as a disaster. He wants to stop them, not start them."

He added, "Netanyahu has become more powerful than before and enjoys strong relations with US national security agencies, but that does not mean he is in a position to make decisions for Trump."

The hostages in Gaza: A negotiating tool or a pretext for escalation?

The hostage issue is one of the most prominent points of contention between Trump and Netanyahu. While Washington is seeking a prisoner exchange deal that includes a ceasefire, Netanyahu views negotiations over the hostages as submission and insists that their release can only be achieved through military operations.

 Kimmitt says, "Netanyahu understands that the hostages are Hamas's only negotiating card, but he prefers to extract them by force rather than negotiation."

As for Trump, according to Kimmitt, he seeks to use the hostage issue as leverage to launch a broader diplomatic process, including a ceasefire in Gaza and negotiations with Tehran. This explains, according to the sources, the American pressure on Israel not to undermine this process.

Amid this disagreement, Iran emerges as the deeper and more sensitive issue. Trump, who withdrew from the nuclear agreement during his first term, is now seeking, according to Kimmitt, to "renew negotiations with harsher terms," ​​while retaining the option of "maximum pressure" if diplomatic efforts fail. 

But Netanyahu does not trust this path. Kimmitt says that Netanyahu considers any negotiation with Tehran a "strategic concession" and explicitly demands "the destruction of the Iranian nuclear program, not its containment."

"This combination of Trump's negotiation efforts and Netanyahu's opposition to them represents a dangerous wedge between the two allies," according to Kimmitt. While Washington views dialogue with Iran as part of its broader regional approach, Tel Aviv views it as a direct threat to its deterrence system.

US Shifts Worry Israel: A Calm with the Houthis and Easing Off Syria

The tensions are not limited to the Gaza and Iran issues, but are expanding to include other signs of Washington's reshuffling of its cards in the region. A truce agreement with the Houthis, a partial lifting of sanctions on Syria, and a cautious opening to Ankara are all steps that have raised concerns among Israeli decision-making circles.

Kimmitt comments: "Trump is not abandoning Israel, but he is reengineering his balance in the Middle East to serve Washington's priorities first." He adds: "Nevertheless, Trump is not against the use of force. He simply avoids wars whenever possible, and if political options fail, he is prepared to return to escalation, whether with Iran or Russia."

Netanyahu: War as a Political Doctrine

In contrast, Kimmitt offers a comprehensive reading of Netanyahu's doctrine, which views war as a means of building deterrence and changing the rules of the game, not merely a means of pressure.

However, under a US president who wants a comprehensive settlement, this approach does not appear to receive full support from the American ally. This highlights the gap between those who believe in changing the equations on the ground and those who seek to consolidate them at the negotiating table.

"A troubled alliance that does not explode... but erodes."

The disagreement between Trump and Netanyahu is not a sudden moment, but rather the result of accumulated visions, priorities, and tools for engaging with regional issues. What has been orchestrated behind the scenes for years has come out into the open today, in the form of a public clash that began with a phone call, but will not stop there.

The relationship between Washington and Tel Aviv may not collapse under Trump, but what is certain is that the new era is characterized by "less of an alliance, more of a dispute." While Trump is betting on calm and putting the regional house in order, Netanyahu insists on a military solution and imposing conditions. In a Middle East that is changing daily, the question remains: Can the two allies overcome the dispute over the hostages, Iran, and Gaza? Or has the rift reached the point of no return?