Netanyahu-Trump Meeting Reveals Unexpected Gaps on Key Issues

 President Donald Trump, left, shakes hands with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he leaves the West Wing of the White House, Monday, April 7, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
President Donald Trump, left, shakes hands with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he leaves the West Wing of the White House, Monday, April 7, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
TT
20

Netanyahu-Trump Meeting Reveals Unexpected Gaps on Key Issues

 President Donald Trump, left, shakes hands with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he leaves the West Wing of the White House, Monday, April 7, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
President Donald Trump, left, shakes hands with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he leaves the West Wing of the White House, Monday, April 7, 2025, in Washington. (AP)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu traveled to Washington this week for a hastily organized White House visit bringing a long list of concerns: Iran's nuclear program. President Donald Trump's tariffs. The surging influence of rival Türkiye in Syria. And the 18-month war in Gaza.

Netanyahu appeared to leave Monday's meeting largely empty-handed — a stark contrast with his triumphant visit two months ago. During an hourlong Oval Office appearance, Trump appeared to slap down, contradict or complicate each of Netanyahu's policy prerogatives.

On Tuesday, Netanyahu declared the meeting a success, calling it a “very good visit” and claiming successes on all fronts. But privately, the Israeli delegation felt it was a tough meeting, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations.

Netanyahu “didn't hear exactly what he wanted to hear, so he returns back home with very little,” said Nadav Eyal, a commentator with the Yediot Ahronot daily, who added that the visit was still friendly, despite the disagreements.

Netanyahu's second pilgrimage to Washington under Trump's second term was organized at short notice and billed as an attempt to address the new US tariff regime. But it came at a pivotal time in Middle East geopolitics. Israel restarted the war in Gaza last month, ending a Trump-endorsed ceasefire, and tensions with Iran are rising over its nuclear program.

Netanyahu and his allies were thrilled with Trump's return to office given his strong support for Israel during his first term. This time around, Trump has not only nominated pro-Israel figures for key administration positions, he has abandoned the Biden administration's criticism of Israel's conduct in Gaza and the West Bank, and of Netanyahu's steps to weaken Israeli courts.

Monday's meeting showed that while Trump remains sympathetic to Israel, Netanyahu's relationship with the president during his second term is more complicated and unpredictable than he may have expected.

Here is a look at where Trump and Netanyahu appear to have diverged.

Netanyahu has long pushed for military pressure against Iran

With Netanyahu's strong encouragement, Trump in 2018 unilaterally withdrew the United States from the agreement between world powers and Iran over its nuclear program. That deal, negotiated by the Obama administration, put curbs on Iran's nuclear program. It was denigrated by Netanyahu because he said it did not go far enough to contain Iran or address Iran's support for regional militant groups.

Netanyahu has long maintained that military pressure was the best way to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Israel struck Iran last year in the countries' first direct conflict ever. But it did not target Iran's nuclear facilities, something Israel would likely need US military assistance to do in order to strike targets buried deep underground.

Trump has suggested, including on Monday, that the US could take military action if Iran doesn't agree to negotiate. But his announcement Monday that talks would take place between the US and Iran this weekend flew in the face of Netanyahu's hawkish views.

Netanyahu gave a tepid endorsement, noting that both leaders agree that Iran cannot develop a nuclear weapon. He said he would favor a diplomatic agreement similar to Libya's deal in 2003 to destroy its nuclear facilities and allow inspectors unfettered access. However, it is not clear if Trump will set such strict conditions.

Eyal said the announcement with Netanyahu by Trump's side was meant to show the transparency between the countries' leadership.

Netanyahu hoped for tariff relief and appeared to be rebuffed

A day before Trump's so-called Liberation Day unleashed global tariffs on the world last week, Israel preemptively announced that it would eliminate all levies on US goods. But that didn't spare Israeli products from being slapped with a 17% tariff by its largest trading partner.

Netanyahu was summoned to Washington ostensibly to make Israel's case against the levy. He was the first international leader to do so, in an encounter that may have set the stage for how other world leaders approach the tariffs.

While Trump repeatedly praised the Israeli leader, he did not appear to budge on Israel's share of the burden. Asked if he might change his mind, he said “maybe not.” He cited the billions of dollars the US gives Israel in military assistance each year — money that is seen as the bedrock of the US-Israel relationship and an insurance policy for US interests in the region.

“We give Israel $4 billion a year. That's a lot,” he said, as though to suggest Israel was already getting enough from the US, and congratulated Netanyahu on that achievement.

Netanyahu was told to be reasonable on Türkiye

Since the fall of the Assad dynasty in Syria late last year, Israel and Türkiye have been competing in the country over their separate interests there. Israel fears that Syria's new leadership will pose a new threat along its border. It has since taken over a buffer zone in Syrian territory and said it will remain there indefinitely until new security arrangements are made.

Türkiye has emerged as a key player in Syria, prompting concerns in Israel over the possibility of Türkiye expanding its military presence inside the country. Netanyahu said Tuesday that Turkish bases in Syria would be a “danger to Israel.”

Once strong regional partners, ties between Israel and Türkiye have long been frosty and deteriorated further over the war in Gaza. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been an outspoken critic of the war, prompting angry reactions from Israeli officials.

Netanyahu sought to hear support from his stalwart ally Trump on a country Israel perceives as increasingly hostile. Instead, Trump lavished praise on Erdogan for “taking over Syria,” positioned himself as a possible mediator between the countries and urged Netanyahu to be “reasonable” in his dealings with the country.

“Israel is not provided with a blank check here,” said Udi Sommer, an expert on US-Israel relations at Tel Aviv University. “There's no unconditional love here. It is contingent. It is contingent on Israel behaving a certain way.”

Trump wants the war in Gaza to end

While both addressed the ongoing war in Gaza and the Israeli hostages who remain held there, the topic appeared to take a backseat to other issues.

Netanyahu spoke of the hostages' plight and an emerging deal to free them, as well as the need to end the “evil tyranny of Hamas.” Trump sympathized with the hostages and made another pitch for his plan to “own” Gaza and remove its Palestinian population, a once fringe idea in Israeli discourse that has now found acceptance among mainstream politicians, including Netanyahu.

However, there were signs of differences on the horizon.

Netanyahu broke the ceasefire last month and has been under major pressure from his governing allies to keep up the fighting until Hamas is crushed. He has appeared to be in no rush to end the war or bring home the remaining hostages.

Trump, however, made it clear that he'd like to see the hostages freed and for the war to end. “And I think the war will stop at some point that won't be in the too distant future,” he said.



Will Israel’s Interceptors Outlast Iran’s Missiles?

The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
TT
20

Will Israel’s Interceptors Outlast Iran’s Missiles?

The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)

Israel has a world-leading missile interception system but its bank of interceptors is finite. Now, as the war drags on, Israel is firing interceptors faster than it can produce them.

On Thursday, The New York Times reporters spoke to current and former Israeli officials about the strengths and weaknesses of Israeli air defense.

Aside from a potentially game-changing US intervention that shapes the fate of Iran’s nuclear program, two factors will help decide the length of the Israel-Iran war: Israel’s reserve of missile interceptors and Iran’s stock of long-range missiles.

Since Iran started retaliating against Israel’s fire last week, Israel’s world-leading air defense system has intercepted most incoming Iranian ballistic missiles, giving the Israeli Air Force more time to strike Iran without incurring major losses at home.

But now, as the war drags on, Israel is firing interceptors faster than it can produce them. That has raised questions within the Israeli security establishment about whether the country will run low on air defense missiles before Iran uses up its ballistic arsenal, according to eight current and former officials.

Already, Israel’s military has had to conserve its use of interceptors and is giving greater priority to the defense of densely populated areas and strategic infrastructure, according to the officials. Most spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak more freely.

Interceptors are “not grains of rice,” said Brig. Gen. Ran Kochav, who commanded Israel’s air defense system until 2021 and still serves in the military reserve. “The number is finite.”

“If a missile is supposed to hit refineries in Haifa, it’s clear that it’s more important to intercept that missile than one that will hit the Negev desert,” General Kochav said.

Conserving Israel’s interceptors is “a challenge,” he added. “We can make it, but it’s a challenge.”

Asked for comment on the limits of its interceptor arsenal, the Israeli military said in a brief statement that it “is prepared and ready to handle any scenario and is operating defensively and offensively to remove threats to Israeli civilians.”

No Israeli official would divulge the number of interceptors left at Israel’s disposal; the revelation of such a closely guarded secret could give Iran a military advantage.

The answer will affect Israel’s ability to sustain a long-term, attritional war. The nature of the war will partly be decided by whether Trump decides to join Israel in attacking Iran’s nuclear enrichment site at Fordo, in northern Iran, or whether Iran decides to give up its enrichment program to prevent such an intervention.

But the war’s endgame will also be shaped by how long both sides can sustain the damage to their economies, as well as the damage to national morale caused by a growing civilian death toll.

Israel relies on at least seven kinds of air defense. Most of them involve automated systems that use radar to detect incoming missiles and then provide officers with suggestions of how to intercept them.

Military officials have seconds to react to some short-range fire, but minutes to judge the response to long-range attacks. At times, the automated systems do not offer recommendations, leaving officers to make decisions on their own, General Kochav said.

The Arrow system intercepts long-range missiles at higher altitudes; the David’s Sling system intercepts them at lower altitudes; while the Iron Dome takes out shorter-range rockets, usually fired from Gaza, or the fragments of missiles already intercepted by other defense systems.

The United States has supplied at least two more defense systems, some of them fired from ships in the Mediterranean, and Israel is also trying out a new and relatively untested laser beam. Finally, fighter jets are deployed to shoot down slow-moving drones.

Some Israelis feel it is time to wrap up the war before Israel’s defenses are tested too severely.

At least 24 civilians have been killed by Iran’s strikes, and more than 800 have been injured. Some key infrastructure, including oil refineries in northern Israel, has been hit, along with civilian homes. A hospital in southern Israel was struck on Thursday morning.

Already high by Israeli standards, the death toll could rise sharply if the Israeli military is forced to limit its general use of interceptors in order to guarantee the long-term protection of a few strategic sites like the Dimona nuclear reactor in southern Israel or the military headquarters in Tel Aviv.

“Now that Israel has succeeded in striking most of its nuclear targets in Iran, Israel has a window of two or three days to declare the victory and end the war,” said Zohar Palti, a former senior officer in the Mossad, Israel’s spy agency.

“When planning how to defend Israel in future wars, no one envisaged a scenario in which we would be fighting on so many fronts and defending against so many rounds of ballistic missiles,” said Palti, who was for years involved in Israel’s defensive planning.

Others are confident that Israel will be able to solve the problem by destroying most of Iran’s missile launchers, preventing the Iranian military from using the stocks that it still has.

Iran has both fixed and mobile launchers, scattered across its territory, according to two Israeli officials. Some of its missiles are stored underground, where they are harder to destroy, while others are in aboveground caches, the officials said.

The Israeli military says it has destroyed more than a third of the launchers. Officials and experts say that has already limited the number of missiles that Iran can fire in a single attack.

US officials said Israel’s strikes against the launchers have decimated Iran’s ability to fire its missiles and hurt its ability to create large-scale barrages.

“The real issue is the number of launchers, more than the number of missiles,” said Asaf Cohen, a former Israeli commander who led the Iran department in Israel’s military intelligence directorate.

“The more of them that are hit, the harder it will be for them to launch barrages,” Cohen added. “If they realize they have a problem with launch capacity, they’ll shift to harassment: one or two missiles every so often, aimed at two different areas simultaneously.”

The New York Times