Israel is not interested in the normalisation of US-Iranian relations. The current indirect negotiations between Washington and Tehran, mediated by Muscat, Oman, are alarming for Tel Aviv.
Does Israel want a political settlement of the Iranian nuclear file?
After a year of fighting, the Israeli army and intelligence services managed to deal tangible blows both to Iran itself (including operations to destroy high-ranking political and military figures) and to pro-Iranian groups in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. The Lebanese Hezbollah not only lost its leader Hassan Nasrallah, but was also defeated in Lebanon and Syria. The fall of the regime of Alawite Bashar al-Assad undermined Iran’s position in Syria.
With the return to power of President Donald Trump in the United States, distinguished by his commitment to a strategic alliance with Israel, hopes have arisen in Tel Aviv for Washington’s support of the military campaign against Iran so as to finally eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat and strengthen the regional role of the Jewish state.
Since the change of leadership in the White House, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already twice visited the United States, where he was received by President Donald Trump. Netanyahu called his first meeting with Trump in 2025 a historic turning point for Israel’s future in the context of security for several generations.
In other words, Donald Trump agreed to increase military assistance to Israel in the confrontation with Hamas and Iran, agreed with the idea of relocating two million Arabs from the Gaza Strip (which is mass ethnic cleansing), that this territory should become the property of American business, and in the future – a world tourism centre without Palestinians. In February, Trump did not rule out a military strike on Iran. The United States began to deploy additional military forces to the Middle East.
However, Netanyahu’s second visit to Washington in April showed that Israel’s hopes for an early war with Iran may not be justified, as Trump forbade his Israeli friend to commit any public military actions towards Iran, which could harm the indirect US-Iranian negotiations. Therefore, Israel considered Netanyahu’s April meeting with Trump a failure.
While negotiations are underway, Washington is prohibiting Israel from taking large-scale military steps towards Iran. Trump has the same position regarding the sharp complication of Israeli-Turkish relations in Syria, suggesting that Israel make the most of diplomatic channels.
Over the course of a month, three rounds of indirect talks were held between the United States and Iran, mediated by Oman. The parties are cautious about commenting on the interim results. At the same time, the optimistic hope and serious intentions of the negotiators are noted, and in some cases there have been leaks about possible options for resolving the Iranian nuclear file. There is a high probability of a political solution to the Iranian issue on the conditions of developing peaceful nuclear energy, the exclusion of a military threat to Israel and the partial easing of anti-Iranian sanctions to allow Iranian goods (primarily oil and gas) to enter world markets.
Would such a peace be satisfactory to Israel? Clearly it would, considering the logic of events and the pragmatism of Jewish thinking.
In light of the current escalation of Turkish-Israeli relations in Syria, a number of Israeli experts believe that the military threat of NATO member Sunni Türkiye to Israel may be much more serious than the local threats from Shi’a Iran and its weakened proxies. Analysts of the Nagel Committee in the Israeli military cabinet came to the same conclusion.
However, influential forces remain in Israel, believing that it is precisely the weakening of Iran’s position in the region that it is necessary to launch a massive strike on its nuclear and energy facilities to deprive Iran not only of nuclear technology, but also of any desire to even begin to think about Israel for many decades. This would set a clear example for other regional and extra-regional forces.
In their defence, Israeli ‘hawks’ note Iran’s unwillingness to recognise the State of Israel, the absence of diplomatic relations between the two countries and public statements by the Iranian leadership about plans to destroy the ‘Zionist regime’. In their opinion, the best way to control the Iranian lack of nuclear technology is for Israel to destroy them.
Supporters of such a militant policy include representatives of the cabinet of ministers and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself with the radical Likud bloc. Bibi fears that he will lose power and the trust of society, and end up being arrested because of the numerous accusations and corruption scandals that have accumulated against him.
Israel can work against Iran by itself
Netanyahu’s government will likely prefer war with Iran rather than peace, but will the US allow this?
Israeli intelligence services Mossad and Aman have repeatedly demonstrated their strength and ability to independently carry out effective and audacious subversive actions. In April, several powerful explosions occurred in the Persian Gulf at the largest Iranian port, Bandar Abbas, allegedly as a result of the improper handling of solid rocket fuel in a container with flammable and chemical materials, which killed 25 people and injured more than 1,000 people, also causing serious damage to the port infrastructure.
This cargo was set for the Iranian port from China, as reported by the British newspaper Financial Times, citing information from the intelligence services of two Western countries. The Iranians planned to replenish rocket stocks with this cargo, which were eliminated by Israeli air attacks during the war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
As a result, significant damage was caused to Iran’s military arsenal and port facilities. The decommissioning of the Bandar Abbas port, through which 85% of container traffic passes (most importantly, Iranian oil), can cause great damage to the country’s economy.
Tel Aviv was quick to deny its involvement, however Iran knows better than anybody else whether it should believe such statements or not.
Azerbaijan was one of the first countries to express its condolences to the Iranian government, and that is understandable. Iran is the southern neighbour of Azerbaijan and on April 28 Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian paid an official visit to Baku. In general, such politeness in diplomacy is a sign of attention. Baku did the same following the strange crash of the Iranian helicopter with President Raisi and Foreign Minister Abdollahian.
However, why shouldn’t Azerbaijan try to act as a mediator in establishing Iranian-Israeli negotiations? In any case, Baku’s mediation in negotiations between friendly Israel and neighbouring Iran sounds much better than Baku’s complicity in Tel Aviv’s anti-Iranian scheming. Such an approach just might not be safe, first of all, for Azerbaijan itself.
Alexander Svarants – Doctor of Political Science, Professor, Turkologist, expert on the Middle East
