Can Netanyahu Derail US-Iran Negotiations?

Many observers following the ongoing US-Iran negotiations aimed at ending the conflict that has engulfed the Middle East for nearly two and a half years believe that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will ultimately accept the outcome of the talks and adapt to whatever settlement emerges.

However, this assumption may prove dangerously misleading. A closer examination of Netanyahu’s political objectives and strategic calculations suggests that he is unlikely to passively accept an agreement that falls short of his vision for the region.

Netanyahu’s Pursuit of “Total Victory”

The more likely scenario is that Netanyahu will first attempt to prevent US President Donald Trump from signing the memorandum of understanding that several media outlets have described as nearly complete. If those efforts fail, he is expected to use every available political and strategic tool to obstruct any subsequent negotiations designed to implement the agreement.

At the heart of Netanyahu’s position is his long-standing objective of achieving what he has repeatedly described as “total victory”. In practical terms, this means he is unlikely to accept any regional settlement before the disarmament of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah, as well as the removal of Iran’s current political system.

While Netanyahu understands that military campaigns have not succeeded in fully achieving these objectives, he appears to believe that the conflict has not yet reached its conclusion and that further pressure may still deliver results that battlefield operations have so far failed to secure.

Having previously persuaded Trump to support two military confrontations with Iran, Netanyahu may also believe he can once again convince Washington to back a third and decisive campaign aimed at bringing down the Iranian government.

Trump’s Different Calculation

Trump appears to view the situation differently.

While he believes previous military confrontations weakened Iran’s leadership, he also faces mounting domestic and international pressure. Many Americans have concluded that confrontation with Iran was unnecessary and served Netanyahu’s personal interests more than American interests or even Israel’s broader national interests.

Internationally, the disruption caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has created significant pressure on global supply chains and contributed to instability in the world economy. These concerns have increased incentives for Washington to seek compromise rather than pursue another military escalation against Iran.

Against this backdrop, Trump has become more receptive to mediation efforts led by Pakistan and supported by several Arab and Muslim-majority countries. These efforts have reportedly produced a near-final draft memorandum of understanding between Washington and Tehran.

Key Elements of the Draft Agreement

According to a report published by Axios, the draft agreement revolves around three main areas.

Ending the Regional Conflict

The first pillar concerns ending the ongoing conflict across the region.

The proposal reportedly includes a 60-day extension of the current ceasefire, with the possibility of renewal. The arrangement would apply to all active fronts, particularly Lebanon. A formal declaration ending the war would follow once both parties agree on outstanding issues.

Measures During the Ceasefire Period

The second pillar focuses on practical measures to be implemented during the ceasefire.

These include:

1. Beginning mine clearance operations in the Strait of Hormuz and reopening the waterway fully to international navigation while guaranteeing safe passage for ships and oil tankers without transit fees.
2. Lifting the maritime and economic restrictions imposed on Iranian ports.
3. Allowing Iran access to an agreed portion of its frozen overseas assets and enabling it to return to global energy markets and export oil without restrictions.
4. Launching negotiations on the gradual removal of economic sanctions and the release of remaining Iranian assets held in international financial institutions.

The Nuclear Issue

The third pillar concerns Iran’s nuclear programme.

According to the reported framework, detailed negotiations would be postponed to a later stage. For now, Iran would reaffirm its commitment not to acquire nuclear weapons and not to retain any uranium enriched to 60 per cent within its territory.

Growing Tensions Between Trump and Netanyahu

Communications between Washington and Tel Aviv have reportedly intensified since Trump decided to suspend the military operation known as “Heavy Hammer” and move towards indirect negotiations with Iran.

According to Axios, one phone call between Trump and Netanyahu lasted more than an hour and was described by media reports as tense. Netanyahu reportedly exerted significant pressure on Trump to resume comprehensive military operations immediately and expressed frustration over Washington’s shift towards diplomacy, which he allegedly viewed as a major strategic mistake.

Following media leaks about the draft memorandum, Netanyahu publicly referred to a conversation with Trump on 23 May 2026. He stated that both leaders agreed any final agreement must eliminate what they describe as the nuclear threat, including dismantling uranium enrichment facilities and removing enriched nuclear material from Iranian territory.

Regional Leaders Enter the Discussion

On 24 May 2026, the White House announced that Trump held a conference call with a number of regional leaders, including Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed, Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, Pakistan’s Army Chief General Asim Munir, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Jordan’s King Abdullah II and Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa.

Some media reports suggested these leaders encouraged Trump to proceed with the memorandum without delay, while other reports claimed Trump used the discussion to encourage additional countries to join the Abraham Accords. This has fuelled speculation that Washington may seek to connect progress in negotiations with Iran to broader regional normalisation efforts involving Israel.

Why Netanyahu Opposes the Proposed Framework

The article argues that Netanyahu may view the reported memorandum as a strategic victory for Iran for several reasons.

First, it would provide Tehran with substantial financial resources through unrestricted oil exports and the release of frozen assets, potentially enabling it to rebuild damaged missile capabilities and strengthen allied groups across the region.

Second, Iran’s missile programme and regional influence reportedly no longer form part of the negotiation agenda, despite being issues that Netanyahu considers central to Israeli security concerns.

Third, detailed negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme would be postponed until a later stage, potentially giving Tehran more leverage and increasing the likelihood that it will seek to preserve as much enrichment infrastructure as possible.

What Comes Next?

For these reasons, Netanyahu is expected to continue trying to prevent the United States from signing the memorandum in its current form. If those efforts fail, he may seek to obstruct implementation through other means.

According to the article’s assessment, this could involve increased military escalation in Lebanon and efforts to destabilise the Lebanese political landscape as a means of undermining the broader diplomatic process. Whether Netanyahu succeeds in this strategy remains uncertain, but the coming days and weeks are likely to provide a clearer answer