Trump says he will decide the end of the war ‘together with Netanyahu’; will it go his way···“He could be swayed until the very end”

This article was translated by an AI tool. Feedback Here.

U.S. displeased with Israel over strikes on Iranian oil storage facilities

U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clasp hands during a press conference at the White House after their summit on September 29 last year (local time). EPA Yonhap News

U.S. President Donald Trump said he will decide, together with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, when to end the war with Iran. It appears that Trump, who is waging an unprecedented joint war, showcased close coordination between the two countries.

However, experts say it is becoming difficult for Trump to end the war at the time and in the manner he prefers. Just as suspicions have been raised that the start of this war was not an independent decision by Trump but was influenced by Netanyahu, the end of the war too is increasingly likely to be swayed by the Israeli prime minister.

In a phone interview with The Times of Israel on the 8th (local time), Trump said that without himself and Netanyahu, “Iran would have destroyed Israel and everything around it,” adding, “We worked together to destroy the country that was trying to destroy Israel.”

When asked whether Netanyahu would also have a say in deciding when to end the war, he said, “It will be a somewhat mutual decision,” adding, “I will take all factors into account and make a decision at the appropriate time.” The outlet reported that this was interpreted to suggest that while Netanyahu would have a voice, final authority rests with the U.S. president. Asked whether Israel could continue its war with Iran even if the United States halted airstrikes, Trump avoided a direct answer but said, “That should not be necessary.”

On the 8th (local time), the skies over Tehran, the Iranian capital, were covered with black smoke due to an explosion at an oil storage depot. Reuters Yonhap News

This war began when Trump embraced Netanyahu’s ‘40-year wish’ that the United States and Israel strike Iran together. In the process, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio made remarks to the effect that they had joined the war due to an ‘imminent threat to Israel’ rather than to the United States, fueling criticism that the war serves Israel rather than U.S. interests.

Experts say that, as with the controversy over how the war started, it is unlikely that ending it will come through an independent decision by President Trump. Because Trump and Netanyahu have very different ultimate goals, and in such cases the side prepared to accept greater risks can exert significant influence over the course of the war.

Jeremy Bowen, the BBC’s international news editor, said, “Netanyahu would actually welcome chaos and crisis being triggered inside Iran, so long as they do not directly affect Israel,” adding, “If Gulf states are busy dealing with turmoil in Iran, they will be in no position to threaten Israel.” He continued, “By contrast, Trump has much to lose,” noting, “He must watch gasoline prices ahead of the election and, as a global power, also maintain relations with Gulf countries.” He warned, “There is a risk that Trump will find it impossible to get out of this war in the way he wants.”

This asymmetry between the two countries was also evident in an Axios report that the Trump administration expressed dismay after Israel bombed more than 30 oil storage facilities in Iran on the 7th. Concerned that images of burning oil tanks would stoke anxiety about oil prices and push already soaring global prices even higher, Washington reportedly conveyed strong displeasure to Israel.

The United States and Israel also envision different outcomes for the next government in Iran. Believing that if the current system in Iran survives in any form it will rebuild nuclear and missile programs the moment international attention shifts elsewhere, Israel has set ‘collapse of the Iranian regime’ as the nonnegotiable ultimate goal of this war.

By contrast, to minimize regional turmoil, Trump has favored moderates within the current regime who would “give up enriched uranium and be willing to concede part of the oil industry of Iran to the United States. However, this U.S. plan has become hopelessly tangled as his second son Mojtaba, who is more hardline than Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was chosen as the next leader after Khamenei was killed by the United States and Israel that day.

Mojtaba Khamenei, chosen as the next leader of Iran. AP Yonhap News

If Israel cannot install a preferred government in Iran, it may even prefer to turn Iran into a civil-war state like Libya. Dani Citrinowicz, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, told the Financial Times, “Israel can accept a civil war in Iran as the price for regime collapse.”

This is also evident in the fact that the U.S. review of a plan to provide military support to the Kurds was the work of Prime Minister Netanyahu. Axios previously reported that the phone call between President Trump and an Iraqi Kurdish leader materialized after months of behind-the-scenes lobbying by Netanyahu.

However, Trump ultimately withdrew the military support plan out of concern that, if the Kurds entered the war, armed groups representing ethnic minorities inside Iran would splinter and the country would slide into a de facto civil war. Because ‘the Libyanization of Iran’ would likely lead to the Middle East war ‘quagmire’ that Trump is so eager to avoid.

This divergence in aims between Trump and Netanyahu is likely to keep producing clashes. Israel attempted to expand regional conflict on its own, outside U.S. control, during the ‘12-day war’ with Iran last June and during airstrikes on Syria that July. At the time, the White House expressed displeasure, saying, “Bibi (the nickname of Prime Minister Netanyahu) acts like a madman and always ruins everything.”