Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump discussed the possibility of launching a major new joint operation targeting Iranian military and nuclear infrastructure before upcoming electoral contests, according to officials familiar with the discussions.
The high-stakes diplomatic and military deliberations center on whether Washington and Jerusalem should resume active combat operations against Tehran ahead of Israel’s October 27 election and the United States midterm elections a week later. The discussions come as Israeli intelligence flags troubling developments regarding Iran’s efforts to reconstitute parts of its nuclear program, specifically pointing to concerns over the potential operation of Pickaxe Mountain as a uranium enrichment site.
Weighing Electoral Timelines and Military Readiness
Resuming full-scale military operations would inject immediate volatility into both political calendars. According to U.S. and Israeli officials, Netanyahu and Trump spoke about a potential joint U.S.-Israeli operation that would hit military and nuclear targets. Trump reportedly told the Israeli leader to “go ahead and get ready,” though American officials emphasized that this instruction carried no definitive operational commitment and could mean action now, later, or never.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu discussed launching a large-scale military offensive against Iran with President Donald Trump ahead of elections in both countries, Israel's Channel 12 reported Tuesday.Citing senior US and Israeli officials, the network said Netanyahu…
The White House has publicly pushed back against the reports. A White House official dismissed claims of a discussion about resuming the war as false, reiterating that the U.S. president has explicitly stated American forces will not attack Iran prior to the midterms. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem stated that Netanyahu maintains regular contact with the U.S. administration but declined to comment on the specific content of private conversations.
Behind closed doors, the diplomatic maneuvering has triggered active military contingency planning. The Israel Defense Forces and U.S. Central Command remain on high alert, completing operational preparations in the event that political leadership greenlights a renewed campaign. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the leadership of U.S. Central Command stand out as the strongest internal advocates for resuming strikes.
Internal Debate Among Presidential Advisers
Despite Pentagon backing for military action, the broader circle of presidential advisers leans toward maintaining economic sanctions and other forms of pressure rather than launching kinetic strikes. A second U.S. official noted that administration discussions frequently return to the argument that ongoing economic sanctions are squeezing Tehran with increasing effectiveness, prompting the faction to advocate for continued pressure without opening a new military front.
Trump himself has oscillated on the matter over recent weeks, leaning initially toward authorizing renewed attacks before growing more hesitant as political and economic risks came into focus. A renewed conflict could trigger massive ballistic missile retaliation from Iran against Israel while simultaneously reminding American voters of an unpopular war and potentially driving domestic fuel prices upward.
Strategic Dilemmas for Military Leadership
The prospect of pre-election hostilities has also created acute friction within Israeli military command structures. IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir conferred with Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine to discuss the possibility of resuming full-scale fighting against Iran within the next three weeks.
Zamir warned that restarting the war on that timeline could cause the Israeli elections to be postponed, given that Iran would probably retaliate. Military planners face the difficult task of executing potential orders while guarding against public perception that a preemptive strike serves as a political mechanism, potentially eroding trust in an institution traditionally viewed as apolitical.
Meanwhile, regional diplomacy continues in parallel. Qatari mediators remain stationed in a holding pattern, waiting for Tehran to respond to the latest American counterproposal aimed at ending the conflict through nuclear concessions and diplomatic channels.
Worth a look
