Iran took center stage on the agenda during Wednesday’s White House meeting between the President and Israeli Prime Minister, with both leaders indicating that diplomacy with Tehran remains uncertain and that coordination will persist if negotiations falter.
Following the meeting, Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social that he pushed for ongoing negotiations but left other options on the table.
“No definitive agreement was reached beyond my insistence that negotiations with Iran continue to see if a deal can be finalized. If it can, I made clear to the Prime Minister that this would be preferable. If not, we will simply have to see what the outcome entails… The last time Iran decided it was better off not making a deal, it was hit with ‘Midnight Hammer’—that did not go well for them.”
Netanyahu’s office stated that the leaders discussed Iran, Gaza, and broader regional developments, agreeing to maintain close coordination, and added that the prime minister emphasized [something] within the context of negotiations.
Earlier in the day, [Israel joined] the U.S.-backed Board of Peace, signing onto the initiative ahead of the meeting after weeks of hesitation. This move places Israel within a forum that includes Western partners as well as Turkey and Qatar, whose involvement in Gaza has drawn criticism in Jerusalem.
Experts note that the decision reflects strategic calculations tied to both Gaza and Iran.
Dr. Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, said Netanyahu’s participation is directly linked to cooperation with Washington and to shaping postwar arrangements in Gaza.
“It is in Israel’s interest for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to join the Board of Peace. He needs a seat at that table even alongside adversarial powers such as the Muslim Brotherhood-aligned countries Qatar and Turkey. Netanyahu’s membership in the Board of Peace is a key element in his cooperation with President Trump to help implement the 20-point plan, with deradicalization, [something], and demilitarization as the first three non-negotiable actions.”
Diker said the decision is also tied to Iran. “A more strategic reason Netanyahu’s membership on the Board of Peace is important is that it represents an element of cooperation to counter the [something]. Netanyahu is likely counting on action against the Iranian regime from the Iranian people themselves and from the United States in the coming weeks. In exchange, Netanyahu continues to cooperate in implementing the 20-point plan in Gaza as part of a quid pro quo.”
Blaise Misztal, vice president for policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, described Israel’s move as a [something] shaped by the incomplete implementation of the Gaza deal and the broader regional threat environment.
“The implementation of the Gaza peace deal leaves much to be desired. Hamas, despite being given 72 hours to release all hostages, took over 100 days to do so; Hamas has still not disarmed; there is neither an International Stabilization Force nor any countries eager to join it; and the Board of Peace comprises countries that have shown themselves to be enemies of peace with Israel.”
He said Israel ultimately chose engagement over isolation. “Proceeding with the deal—including joining the Board of Peace—is Israel’s least bad option. Israel has a better chance of countering or balancing Turkish and Qatari influence on the Board of Peace by being in the room with them, rather than outside it.”
Misztal also linked the timing to Iran. “With the United States having a real chance to disarm, or even topple, the Iranian regime and the risk that Tehran might yet lash out at Israel, there is no interest in doing anything that would risk restarting the war in Gaza.”