In a high-stakes meeting at the White House this week, former President Donald Trump privately indicated he would not oppose Israeli military action against Iran if Tehran resumed its pursuit of a nuclear weapon, according to senior U.S. and Israeli officials. The discussion, held behind closed doors with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, comes amid renewed tension following last month’s Israeli and U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
Publicly, Trump struck a cautious tone, expressing hope that further military confrontation with Iran could be avoided. “I can’t imagine wanting to do that,” he said of future U.S. bombings. Privately, however, sources say Netanyahu made it clear Israel would not hesitate to act if Iran moved toward bomb development. Trump reportedly reiterated his preference for a diplomatic solution, but did not object to Israeli plans for potential future strikes.
Diplomatic Crossroads
The conversation underscores the diverging yet interconnected strategies of the three key players—Iran, Israel, and the United States. Trump is relying on the threat of renewed military action to push Iran into agreeing to halt its nuclear ambitions. Israel, for its part, remains skeptical that diplomacy alone will succeed, and views military pressure as essential. Iran, meanwhile, is demanding security guarantees before resuming talks, insisting on its right to enrich uranium.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has voiced cautious openness to restarting negotiations but emphasized the need for assurances against further attacks. While Iran continues to claim a peaceful nuclear program, Western and Israeli assessments suggest the potential for a renewed rush toward weaponization remains real.
Aftermath of the Strikes
According to Israeli intelligence, the coordinated U.S.-Israeli strikes delayed Iran’s nuclear timeline by up to two years, a view shared by the Pentagon. However, a portion of Iran’s stockpile of near-weapons-grade uranium reportedly survived at the Isfahan site, raising concerns that Tehran could attempt recovery operations. Other key facilities, such as Natanz and Fordow, are believed to have sustained more serious damage, impeding Iran’s ability to restart enrichment there.
Any move by Iran to reactivate its nuclear efforts would likely be detected quickly, Israeli officials claim. Moreover, Israel is prepared to continue its shadow campaign of covert actions targeting Iranian scientists and infrastructure if necessary.
Strategic Risk for Washington
Analysts warn that the United States could find itself in a reactive posture if Israel unilaterally escalates military pressure on Iran. “Trump mostly wants the Iran problem to just go away,” said Gabriel Noronha, a former State Department official. While Trump remains firm on preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, he appears open to flexibility in other areas of a potential deal.
Still, with deep mistrust lingering in Tehran—especially following the attacks—the path to diplomacy remains uncertain. Many experts believe Iran, if it chooses to resume its nuclear program, would likely do so in secret at undeclared, fortified sites out of reach of Israeli munitions.
Growing Pressure on All Sides
The absence of a formal date for new negotiations highlights the ongoing uncertainty. While the strikes have reinforced Trump’s core demand—that Iran must halt uranium enrichment—they’ve also made it harder to reach a deal. “Trump can’t back down on zero enrichment, and Iran will feel it can’t concede that as a result of being attacked,” said Dan Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel.
The stakes continue to rise. Iran has suspended cooperation with the U.N. atomic watchdog, complicating any future verification regime. Meanwhile, European powers are warning that Iran’s noncompliance could trigger the return of sanctions lifted under the 2015 nuclear deal. A key decision deadline looms in October.
With trust eroded and both sides hardening their positions, the prospect of a renewed nuclear agreement grows more distant—while the risk of a new conflict inches closer.