With Gaza still burning and corruption charges mounting, Israel’s prime minister arrives in D.C. looking for favors, not peace
Fresh off a bruising 12-day war with Iran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is flying back to Washington. This will be his third visit to the US since Donald Trump returned to the White House – but arguably the most consequential. For Netanyahu, it’s more than a diplomatic courtesy call: it’s a chance to cash in on battlefield momentum, convert military theatrics into political capital, and solidify his standing with Israel’s most crucial ally.
According to Israeli media, Netanyahu’s agenda goes beyond flag-waving and photo ops. He’s expected to push forward on defense cooperation, intelligence sharing, and a new trade deal. But above all, he wants to translate Israel’s perceived tactical success into long-term strategic advantage – ensuring that Washington remains firmly aligned with Israeli goals on regional security.
Quiet talks on the Golan Heights
Leaked reports suggest that the prime minister’s diplomatic playbook includes more than bilateral handshakes. One of the most sensitive issues on the table is the future of the Golan Heights. Sources say Israel has quietly renewed contacts with Syria’s new leadership under Abu Mohammad al-Julani – a former jihadist now vying for international legitimacy. Behind closed doors, officials are floating the idea of a partial agreement in which Syria might recognize Israel’s control over the Golan, in exchange for security coordination and regional stabilization.
But there’s a catch: a real deal would demand Israeli concessions, and Netanyahu, still projecting strength, seems unwilling to budge. US officials are aware of these backchannel discussions and are said to be involved at key moments – though how far they’re willing to go remains unclear.
A fragile public mandate
On paper, Israel’s military operation dealt a heavy blow to Iran’s infrastructure, damaging key parts of its nuclear program and military network. But at home, the narrative isn’t so tidy. The Iranian regime didn’t collapse – far from it. Instead, Iranian society rallied around its leadership, framing the conflict as a defense of national sovereignty. In Israel, critics argue that Netanyahu oversold the war’s objectives and underdelivered on its results.
The war left other wounds too. Dozens of Israeli hostages remain in Hamas custody – a painful, unresolved issue. Despite media efforts to frame the prime minister as a wartime leader, Netanyahu is facing sharp questions not just from his political opponents, but from restless members of his own coalition.
American pressure: Hostages first, victory later
According to Haaretz, the Trump administration is growing impatient. US officials are urging Israel to suspend active operations in Gaza and prioritize a deal to bring home the hostages. The message from Washington is blunt: finish the humanitarian business now; total victory can wait.
The newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth reports that Netanyahu’s tone has shifted. His previous rhetoric about “total victory” has been quietly replaced by talk of “humanitarian obligations” and “pragmatic solutions.” That shift may signal a soft pivot toward a temporary truce.
Meanwhile, Channel 12 notes that the Israel Defense Forces are pressing the government to define a clear path forward. Should Israel double down and seize full control of Gaza – or cut a deal with Hamas for a phased prisoner exchange? According to military sources, the army favors the second option, seeing it as more realistic and less likely to spiral into chaos.
Diplomatic backchanneling and military signals
In the lead-up to the Washington summit, Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer arrived in the US to test the waters and align messaging. Around the same time, the US approved a new $510 million defense contract with Israel, including over 7,000 sets of precision-guided JDAM munitions.
The juxtaposition is striking: even as Washington pushes for de-escalation in Gaza, it continues to arm its closest Middle Eastern ally. The signal is mixed – and may reflect internal divisions within the Trump administration about how hard to press Israel toward restraint.
Negotiating with Hamas: A deal still far off
At the heart of the current deadlock is the question of a ceasefire. Hamas has proposed an immediate and full halt to hostilities, along with the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. Israel has rejected the offer – unwilling to hand over military leverage without securing the return of its citizens.
With roughly 50 hostages still held in Gaza, the pressure on Netanyahu is mounting. But the path to an agreement remains narrow and treacherous. Mistrust runs deep, and the window for compromise is closing fast.
Trump’s personal stakes
It’s no secret that Trump sees himself as a dealmaker – especially in the Middle East. His declared “victory” over Iran has set the stage for a new diplomatic push. If he can now broker a ceasefire in Gaza and bring Israeli hostages home, it would be a headline-grabbing foreign policy win ahead of his domestic battles.
But Netanyahu isn’t rushing to help Trump craft his legacy. The prime minister remains wary: despite public praise from the US president, he’s received no guarantees on issues closer to home – such as immunity from prosecution in his two ongoing corruption trials.
Netanyahu’s political minefield
These criminal cases are more than a legal headache – they’re a political time bomb. Trump’s vocal support, including recent calls to drop the charges, may play well with Netanyahu’s base, but they’ve stirred unease among Israeli institutions. Some officials see this transatlantic alliance as an attempt to shield the prime minister from accountability.
Within Israel, any deal with Hamas – especially one that involves concessions – risks alienating Netanyahu’s hardline supporters. For a leader trying to balance survival with statesmanship, the choices are narrowing.
Diverging agendas, shared deadlines
A rift is forming between Washington and West Jerusalem. Trump wants swift results – a diplomatic breakthrough that he can sell as evidence of his leadership. Netanyahu, by contrast, is playing a slower game: buying time, protecting his flank, and avoiding decisions that might weaken him politically.
Whether they can bridge this gap will define the outcome of the upcoming talks. For Trump, success means a dramatic headline: “I stopped the war.” For Netanyahu, it’s about navigating the storm without sinking.
In an ideal scenario – at least from West Jerusalem’s point of view – Trump might back a new Israeli campaign against Iran. That would offer Netanyahu a cleaner battlefield, clearer objectives, and the chance to write a more triumphant chapter in his political story.
But for now, both leaders are walking a tightrope – balancing war, diplomacy, and ambition – hoping not to fall before the next election.
