The United States and Israel are fighting the same war. They just don’t agree on what winning it looks like.
As the campaign against Iran stretches into its second month with no peace deal in sight, the two allies are grappling with a fundamental tension at the heart of their joint operation: their goals diverge in ways that matter — and it’s not clear whether America can declare victory if Israel’s objectives remain unfulfilled.
The three core goals of Israel’s Operation Roaring Lion are to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, its ballistic missile capabilities, and its support for proxy groups that have terrorized the region. While the White House has said targeting Iran’s armed proxies and the regime’s ability to possess a nuclear weapon are also among the U.S. goals, military officials have stated a narrower set of objectives for Operation Epic Fury: eliminate Iran’s navy, destroy its ballistic missiles system and dismantle its defense production infrastructure.
In the early days of the war, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth praised the U.S.-Israel partnership. “Only the United States of America could lead this — only us — but when you add the Israeli Defense Forces, a devastatingly capable force, the combination is sheer destruction,” Hegseth said. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine added that the two militaries were working in coordination — the U.S. attacking Iran’s southern flank while the Israeli Air Force focused on the north — with routine communication allowing them to “coordinate, integrate and synchronize activities while maintaining separate efforts.”
The friction between those separate efforts has grown more visible in recent weeks.
Nothing illustrated that divergence more than Israel’s strike on the South Pars gas field jointly operated by Iran and Qatar — a move that spooked global oil markets and forced Trump to distance himself from an attack he says the U.S. “knew nothing about.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later said Israel “acted alone.”
“We hold the cards, we have objectives, those objectives are clear,” Hegseth said following the bombing of South Pars when asked why the U.S. is helping Israel prosecute a war with contradictory goals. “We have allies pursuing objectives as well.”
The episode underscored a political asymmetry at the heart of the alliance. The U.S. is acutely sensitive to rising energy prices in a midterm election year, with Trump’s Republican Party facing significant headwinds. Israel has no comparable domestic constraint.
The most fundamental divergence involves the question of regime change. Hegseth declared at his first press conference after the strikes began: “This is not a regime change war.” Yet Netanyahu has repeatedly described regime change in Iran as central to resolving the conflict.
Even U.S. intelligence officials have conceded the overall U.S. and Israeli objectives differ – during a worldwide threats hearing on March 19, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard noted that while the U.S. has been focused on destroying military assets and capability, Israeli operations have been focused on “taking out” members of Iranian leadership.
“The objectives that have been laid out by the president are different from the objectives that have been laid out by the Israeli government,” Gabbard said. She also said she did not know Israel’s position on a potential U.S. deal with Iran to end the war.
CIA Director John Ratcliffe added that the intelligence community had briefed the president that killing Iran’s supreme leader could result in a successor who is even more hardline. “The president’s objectives with respect to Operation Epic Fury did not include regime change,” Ratcliffe told Congress. “That may be different from what Israel’s objectives were.”
Israel’s campaign to decapitate Iran’s leadership has begun to constrain Washington’s diplomatic options. Trump himself acknowledged early in the conflict that potential Iranian interlocutors were being eliminated in the strikes. “Pretty soon we’re not going to know anybody,” he said.
Last week, the U.S. intervened directly on the question. Israel agreed to remove Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi — a central figure in past nuclear negotiations — and parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf from its targeting list, according to a diplomat stationed in Iran with knowledge of the discussions. The move came after Pakistan urged Washington to press its ally to stand down.
“The Israelis had their coordinates and wanted to take them out — the U.S. administration were told that if they are also eliminated, then there is no one else to talk to, hence the U.S. asked the Israelis to back off,” the diplomat told MS NOW, granted anonymity given the sensitivity of the discussions.
An Israeli official, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the diplomatic relationship, told MS NOW that Israel’s targeting of Iranian officials has not been a point of tension between the two allies. “We always said, starting this war, that our goal is to weaken the regime to the point that the Iranian people can choose and decide their own fate — that did not change over time,” said the official. A separate front is also complicating any diplomatic endgame. Israel has simultaneously waged an offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon, killing more than 1,000 people and displacing more than a million others. On Sunday, Netanyahu announced he had instructed “to further expand the existing security zone” in southern Lebanon, telling citizens of Israel, “we are determined to fundamentally change the situation in the north” of his country. The U.S. has neither participated in that campaign nor pushed back against it, according to the Israeli official. “It was clear from the beginning that we’re going to handle it on our own, and that’s what we’re doing and still doing,” the official told MS NOW. “We didn’t ask for American involvement on this, and we didn’t get any negative feedback to what we’re doing there.” That matters for any ceasefire framework: Iran has listed an end to hostilities “across all fronts, including for all Iranian proxies in the region” as one of five non-negotiable conditions for any agreement, according to a diplomat stationed in Iran granted anonymity given the sensitivity of discussions. Whether Israel would halt its Lebanon campaign as part of a U.S.-brokered deal remains an open question. The Israeli official confirmed to MS NOW that Israel has not been — and would not be — included in any potential peace talks between the U.S. and Iran. Pakistan’s foreign minister said his country is preparing to host the two sides “in coming days” for “a comprehensive and lasting settlement of the ongoing conflict.” Last week, Netanyahu struck an optimistic tone after speaking with Trump, saying a potential agreement would “safeguard our vital interests.” Trump, in turn, expressed confidence that Israel would accept a deal. “This will be peace for Israel,” the president told reporters. “Long-term peace. Guaranteed peace.” But American and Israeli officials acknowledge the bar is different for each country. Israel shares a region with Iran and its proxies; the U.S. does not. “We have our red lines, the Americans know them,” the Israeli official told MS NOW. “As we started this work together in a very, very coordinated way, I don’t anticipate the cooperation would change.” The official added that Netanyahu and Trump’s personal relationship has “proved to be close and reliable, and I’m sure they’ll be coordinated on the issue of if and when to finish the war as well.”
Julia Jester covers politics for MS NOW and is based in Washington, D.C. Recommended
