Behind the scenes of the advancing American-Iranian negotiations, a deepening anxiety has taken hold in Tel Aviv. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is now in near-daily contact with President Donald Trump, according to senior Israeli officials, reflecting a level of engagement that belies earlier suggestions of surprise. The direct line between the prime minister’s office and the White House team has been constant, yet Israeli unease remains palpable. What worries Jerusalem is not a lack of information but the possibility that Washington, in pursuit of a final accord to end its military confrontation with Tehran, may yield ground in the closing stages.

The talks, described by regional sources as approaching a decisive phase, have produced a draft text that both sides are weighing. Viewed from Washington, a deal would represent a strategic off-ramp from a costly conflict. But from Tel Aviv, the calculus is different. Israeli officials have articulated three red lines: no premature lifting of economic sanctions, stringent constraints on Iran’s ballistic missile programme, and a dismantling of the network of proxy forces that Teheran has cultivated across the Middle East. Beyond these, Israel is demanding that any agreement explicitly preserve the freedom of the Israeli Defence Forces to act against emerging threats in the region — a clause that would effectively retain the military option.

Netanyahu’s conversations with Trump and his senior aides this past Wednesday were designed not merely to monitor progress but to test the firmness of American positions. A senior American official confirmed that the prime minister is seeking assurances that the core principles he considers non-negotiable are not being traded away. Analysts in London note that this dynamic places Trump in a delicate position: he must balance the desire for a diplomatic breakthrough — one that would silence domestic war fatigue — against the strategic imperatives of an ally whose intelligence and military capabilities have been central to the campaign against Iran’s nuclear and regional ambitions.

The Israeli military has been ordered to prepare for every contingency, including a resumption of hostilities should the diplomatic track collapse or yield terms deemed unacceptable. This is not merely posturing. The IDF has maintained a high state of readiness, and observers in the Gulf interpret this as a signal that Israel will act unilaterally if the emerging accord fails to address its core security concerns. The coming days will test whether Washington’s determination to end the war can accommodate Jerusalem’s demand for a settlement that does not simply postpone the next confrontation. The answer, as always, lies in the fine print — and in the trust, or lack of it, between two allies whose interests are converging but not yet aligned.