White House officials are bracing for a dramatic rupture between Donald Trump and his Israeli counterpart as the president’s new conflict in the Middle East rages on.
Three Trump administration insiders told Axios on Wednesday “they believe he’ll want to end major operations before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.”
Ongoing U.S. strikes, which the president launched against Iran on Feb. 28, have so far largely focused on military targets in the country.
But Israeli attacks have also included assassinations of top political and internal security figures, as well as open talk of creating conditions for Iranians to overthrow the repressive Islamic regime.
The three officials told Axios that Trump views regime change as a “bonus,” but is still aiming to end the war once its “core military objectives,” which they believe include gutting its missile and nuclear programs, have been met.
“Israel has other focuses and we know that,” one adviser said. “Israel is going to try and kill [Iran’s] new leader,” another added. “They’re much more interested in that than we are.”
“Israel doesn’t hate the chaos. We do. We want stability,” a third said. “Netanyahu? Not so much, especially in Iran. They hate the Iranian government a lot more than we do.”
Trump himself has suggested that Netanyahu’s endgame to the conflict may be “a little bit different” from his own. “You know, they’re there and we’re very far away,” he told reporters Sunday.
He also told Axios that he and the Israeli PM are “working great together.” The president, who’s long been accused of a tendency to agree with the last person who flattered him, has apparently spoken with Netanyahu almost every day.
Confidence among the Trump aides who spoke with the outlet Tuesday about the goals of his campaign comes after the president offered four different rationales for the conflict in just the two days after he started it, and amid growing anxiety elsewhere in the White House that the president may have “grossly overestimated his ability” to bring the war to a swift conclusion.
Trump first said his assault was designed to liberate the Iranian people, then that it was intended to put an end to the regime’s nuclear program, then that its goal was a change of leadership, and lastly that it was in response to an imminent threat of attacks on U.S. bases.
The president has further offered conflicting timelines for the campaign, ranging from the war already being over to the possibility of it lasting “forever.”
Critics, many of them noting a seemingly circular logic behind pre-emptive action against retaliatory strikes, have raised the alarm after it emerged the “imminent threat” referenced by the White House actually appeared to have been against Israel.
The resignation of Joe Kent, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, threw those concerns into sharp relief Tuesday.
“Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby,” he wrote in a statement.
A senior Trump official told Axios ahead of Kent’s resignation that “we are cognizant of the appearance of doing Israel’s bidding,” but insisted it was not the case and said that “perception” is “not helpful.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, asked last week whether Iran would need to capitulate to both U.S. and Israel before the conflict is over, said only that “our objectives are our objectives,” and that “we’ll set the tempo of when those are met.”
The Daily Beast has contacted the White House for comment on this story.
