Israel launched renewed airstrikes on Iran on Monday, defying US President Donald Trump, in an effort to secure influence over peace negotiations from which it has been largely excluded.
The strikes followed Iranian missile fire at Israel, which Tehran said was retaliation for Israeli attacks on Lebanon’s capital, reports Reuters.
Both Israel and Iran agreed to a temporary halt after Trump called for an end to the fighting, although both sides left the possibility of resuming strikes open.
Analysts said Israel’s actions were intended to signal that Washington cannot finalise any agreement with Iran without accounting for Israeli security interests.
“Because if it tramples too heavily on Israeli interests, Israel can overturn the table,” said Danny Orbach, military historian at Hebrew University.
Trump, who launched the war alongside Israel in February, has sought to negotiate a settlement with Iran while keeping Israel out of direct talks.
He publicly urged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to restrain military actions that might jeopardise negotiations, including attacks in Lebanon, which Israel invaded in March targeting Hezbollah. Iran has insisted that a ceasefire in Lebanon is a prerequisite for any US-Iran deal.
Last week, Netanyahu paused airstrikes on Beirut after a phone call with Trump, who later admitted to calling the Israeli leader “fucking crazy” during the exchange but maintained that their overall relations remain cordial.
Critics at home accused Netanyahu of compromising Israeli sovereignty by limiting military operations to support US diplomacy without obtaining a seat at the negotiating table.
Following Israel’s strike on Lebanon on Sunday and Iran’s retaliatory missile fire, Trump described the exchanges as concluded. “Each of them had their fun,” he told Axios. “Israel had its strike and Iran had its strike. We don’t need another one.”
However, Israel determined that only by striking Iranian territory itself could it prevent a precedent in which Iranian attacks were viewed as a legitimate response to Israeli operations in Lebanon.
A senior Israeli defence official told Reuters that Netanyahu convened top security and defence advisors to discuss goals for a short-term escalation, including establishing that any future US-Iran deal would not restrict
Israel’s right to attack Hezbollah in southern Lebanon or maintain its troop presence there. Netanyahu raised the issue in weekend phone calls with Trump.
In a brief televised statement on Monday night, after the truce, Netanyahu told the public that Israel would respond forcefully to any future Iranian attack. “I say this to you,” he stated, “as I say it with appreciation and respect in my good conversations with my friend President Trump.”
The episode highlights underlying strains between the two conservative leaders. Privately, Netanyahu has acknowledged limited influence over Trump’s approach to Iran, telling aides he has “no manoeuvre” to steer U.S. decision-making.
Analysts note that while Israel can conduct limited strikes on Iran independently, it would still require US support to sustain an extended air campaign.
“There’s no doubt that Israel cannot go alone in this war for a long, long time, because ammunition is consumable,” said Yehoshua Kalisky, senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies.
Military experts emphasise that prolonged operations would be difficult without Washington’s backing, including logistical, intelligence, and political support.
The brief resumption of hostilities exposes the delicate balance Israel must maintain asserting its security prerogatives while navigating Washington’s diplomatic framework.
Analysts suggest that Israel’s short strike demonstrates both capability and intent, sending a clear message that it expects a say in any negotiated settlements with Iran, while avoiding escalation into a wider conflict.
