Israel, Iran, Trump and Netanyahu with Breaking Points

We think Trump could bring peace to the Middle East. We analyse Breaking Points interesting segment.

Breaking Points is one of a slew of high quality, independent news outlets that have become the go to source for authentic news and analysis. Here is the link to their full video here on the Middle East.

The two speakers are Ryan Grim & Saagar Enjeti, who go through some interesting issues at this critical time in the Middle East. In italics we provide our thoughts on these issues.

Israel’s Potential Strike on Iran and Trump’s Stance

Ryan Grim:

There are new developments out of Israel, particularly regarding Netanyahu's claims that war with Iran may be imminent and that the Trump administration is supportive of it. This speculation began last week with a quiet piece in The Washington Post titled "Israel Likely to Strike Iran in Coming Months, Warns U.S. Intelligence."

The significance of this report is that U.S. intelligence officials leaked it to The Washington Post, Washington D.C.'s major newspaper. The leak suggests concern within the U.S. intelligence community that Israel is planning an attack on Iran. Under the outgoing Biden administration, there was already an assessment that Israel had a high likelihood of striking Iran within the first six months of 2025.

At the time, the Biden administration considered whether to publicly endorse such a move but ultimately decided against it. Now, Israel is claiming that it has Trump’s approval for an attack.

Saagar Enjeti:

Trump recently gave an interview with Fox News where he reiterated that the U.S. will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. He outlined two options: either blowing up Iran’s nuclear facilities or negotiating a deal. He stated that he prefers the latter, but he did not rule out supporting an Israeli strike.

Steve Witkoff, a Trump adviser, echoed similar sentiments, emphasizing that Iran’s nuclear ambitions are a major threat and that the U.S. government remains open to diplomatic solutions. However, if diplomacy fails, other measures may be necessary.

Our thoughts: As usual Trump is keeping people on their toes. On the one hand he supplied Israel with the most powerful bombs to date (see here). On the other hand, it is not clear Netanyahu got what he wanted from his trip to Washington - specifically a commitment on a joint attack on Iran. He spent a long time there, but the commitment to take on Iran together doesn’t seem forthcoming. Reading between the lines, Trump is pushing for a ‘non-nuclear armed Iran’ in exchange for re-normalisation, whilst arming Israel with more advanced weapons. In his first term, he sacked Iran hawk, John Bolton, who has excoriated Trump ever since. There was a brief escalation after the assassination of a senior Iranian general, that was then contained. Trump expressed disappointment with Netanyahu over that episode. When Netanyahu originally promoted the war in Iraq, back in 2002 (clip here), he spoke of how it would transform the ‘Middle East’ - well it has. The Middle East is now on its knees economically, devastated by three decades of intervention. For what ever reason the American model of intervention in Germany and Japan (that left them richer after WWII, wasn’t applied in the Middle East. Our view is that if the US is drawn into a war with Iran, it would be devastating for Iran, but it would also complete the transition in global power from the US to China.

Israel-Gaza Conflict and Its Regional Implications

Ryan Grim:

This entire discussion is happening in the broader context of the Israel-Gaza war. If the Israeli assault on Gaza were an isolated geopolitical conflict, Trump’s support for Netanyahu’s hardline approach would likely be unchecked. However, it intersects with larger regional considerations, particularly Trump’s interest in a Saudi-Israeli peace deal and an Iran nuclear agreement.

Ironically, Trump, who previously dismantled Obama’s Iran nuclear deal, now sees renegotiating a similar agreement as a potential legacy-defining achievement. His approach seems to involve extreme rhetoric followed by pragmatic deal-making.

Saagar Enjeti:

This strategy is similar to what he did with North Korea—first, he threatened to "wipe them off the face of the Earth," and then he pursued diplomatic engagement. He may be adopting the same “madman” approach here, signalling extreme support for Netanyahu before pivoting to a negotiated settlement.

One of the few things sustaining the ceasefire discussions right now is this broader diplomatic balancing act. However, Israeli actions continue to jeopardise the ceasefire, such as a recent strike that killed two Palestinian police officers guarding an aid convoy in Gaza. Hamas has responded by warning that such attacks violate the ceasefire agreement.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu, speaking at a major pro-Israel conference, authorized his negotiators to return to Cairo for further discussions on a phase-two deal. This phase includes exchanging all remaining hostages and initiating reconstruction efforts, which are supposed to lead to a permanent ceasefire. However, the role of Hamas in post-war governance remains a key sticking point.

Our thoughts: Hamas has indicated it would step back in a post-conflict era. That is a major problem for Netanyahu, as he has promised his right-wing coalition that this war would carry on and they expect Gaza to be settled (there is even a new department to implement the ethnic cleansing link here). A pacified Hamas leaves no reason to act, aside from to complete the genocide. Trump seems to have other ideas. He has gone for a ‘crazy’ idea (that was never going to happen for many reasons), and as a result now there is movement amongst the Arab states. ‘Stable genius’ or chaos - there is movement, that Biden did not achieve. Keep in mind, Biden seemed to have the same plan of an Arab coalition, but he could not make it happen.

The U.S. Perspective: Trump’s Strategy and Netanyahu’s Calculations

Ryan Grim:

There’s a telling dynamic at play. Hamas has signalled a willingness to demilitarize and allow governance by a technocratic administration under international guarantees from the U.S., Egypt, the UAE, and others. However, the primary obstacle now seems to be Israel’s reluctance to accept this arrangement.

If Hamas were to surrender, what argument would Netanyahu have left for continuing the war? Israel has previously stated that the war would end if Hamas surrendered and hostages were released, yet they appear hesitant to accept such terms.

Saagar Enjeti:

The broader question is why the Trump-Netanyahu relationship is shifting back and forth. Initially, Trump seemed to give Netanyahu full backing, but now there’s a push to return to negotiations. Could this be tied to a grander deal with Iran? The Washington Post report suggested that U.S. officials were aware of Israeli plans to strike Iran but did nothing about it.

Ryan Grim:

If Trump genuinely wants a permanent ceasefire, a Saudi-Israeli normalization, and an Iran nuclear deal, he has to accumulate political capital with pro-Israel donors and hardliners. He may be doing this by initially endorsing Netanyahu’s extreme rhetoric before later pivoting to a diplomatic resolution.

Saagar Enjeti:

This fits Trump’s past behavior—starting with aggressive posturing before transitioning to deal-making. However, the danger is that Netanyahu might take Trump’s rhetoric at face value and act on it, pushing the region further toward war.

Our thoughts: The Trump-Netanyahu relationship is complex. In the first term, Trump’s base was fully behind Netanyahu, making the latter more powerful. In that term Trump believed (stated) that Netanyahu betrayed him (here), during the Iranian General’s Assassination. In the second term there is a split in the Trump base. The isolationist side of the conservative base, see Israel as a problem - ‘continually dragging the US into Middle East wars’ - this is visible on Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, military veterans like the Eisenhower Media Network, and others. The Israel Lobby (as defined by John Mearsheimer, being the Christian Evangelicals, the Military Industrial Complex and AIPAC), have the same agenda as the last term. Further, the forces behind Trump (the Project 2025 group) are most concerned the China. Being mired in Ukraine and then the Middle East does not tie with their objectives of containing or at least balancing China. Just before inauguration, Trump tweeted an interview by Jeffrey Sachs (here), an ardent critic of Netanyahu and the Zionist project. Israeli news reports said this made Netanyahu very nervous. His gift to Trump of a ‘golden pager’ is also interesting. Zionists have been handing out ‘pagers’ to critics as a threat (here). Our money is on Trump delivering peace to the Middle East for three reasons (a) it has popular support - the Democrats blame Gaza for their loss, and Trump wants Congress for his full four years (elections in 2 years) (b) the movement that backs Trump is most concerned with China (so that means getting out of the Middle East), ( c) with a new Cold War on the horizon, a key part of the Israel Lobby (the Military Industrial Complex) will have a new budget to focus on the Cold War - so the Israel Lobby is breaking up and (d) the US fiscal position is bad, and the Middle East spending for the past three decades has been unproductive.

Israel’s Military Conduct and Human Rights Violations

Ryan Grim:

A recent investigative report from 972 Magazine, an Israeli news outlet, revealed disturbing war crimes by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). One of the most horrifying accounts describes how IDF soldiers strapped explosives to an elderly Palestinian couple and used them as human shields before executing them.

Additionally, the IDF discovered that bunker-buster bombs used in Gaza produced massive amounts of carbon monoxide, effectively suffocating individuals trapped in tunnels. Reports indicate that a significant number of Israeli hostages died as a result of this tactic. Only after realizing that hostages were being killed did the military begin assessing potential risks before deploying these bombs.

Saagar Enjeti:

This aligns with testimony from released hostages who described their number one fear as Israeli bombing, not their captors. Many of them reported hearing explosions above them constantly.

Our thoughts: Andrew Loewenstein’s film on the Palestine Laboratory (see summary interview here) is essential viewing. We have seen a very dystopian world in Gaza for the past 18 months. AI algorithms, driving a points system that then determines if you are targeted by a bomb. Suggestions, that these are optimised to strike entire families, with dozens of examples of entire families wiped out. It is in the world’s interests that this is prosecuted fully, unless we enter a more dystopian future. Other countries are buying this tech, and we may see this in future warfare, unless it is checked here.

Trump’s “Madman” Diplomacy and the Role of Steve Witkoff

Ryan Grim:

Trump reportedly refers to Steve Witkoff as a “modern-day Kissinger” due to his involvement in foreign policy negotiations. Witkoff has secured hostage releases, negotiated with Russia, and is now working on Gaza negotiations. If he successfully brokers a peace deal or facilitates a major diplomatic breakthrough, he could become one of Trump’s key foreign policy figures.

Saagar Enjeti:

Witkoff has the ideal background for diplomacy—experience in international finance, real estate, and complex deal-making. Most importantly, he has Trump’s complete trust, built over decades of friendship. His role in securing the first phase of the hostage deal saved many lives, and he is now engaged in high-level talks with Russia and Saudi Arabia regarding broader geopolitical issues.

If he succeeds in achieving Phase Two in Gaza or negotiates a Ukraine peace deal, he could solidify his status as Trump’s chief diplomatic operator.

Our thoughts: Witkoff is a great choice. Aside from being a trustworthy advisor to Trump, he is from outside of the Washington ‘swamp’. As John Mearsheimer points out in his book, The Israel Lobby, the process of making appointments requires approval by Congress, who then are funded by the Israel Lobby. In Witkoff, Trump has found an outsider, not subject to influence. If Trump succeeds here it will be quite a feat. It is worth remembering of course that Trump’s plan isn’t new. Biden promoted the idea of a pan-Arab force in Gaza, but couldn’t get buy in (from the Arab states or Israel). Trump seems to be edging towards such an outcome. Let’s see. As President Erdogan quipped some months ago -‘Turkish troops will be in Gaza’ - perhaps. That said, given Turkey’s fiscal position, it is worth taking Erdogan’s statements with a pinch of salt.

Read the rest of the piece for free on Substack here.