Dr. Hassan Ayoub: Washington summoned Netanyahu to prevent a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities and give him the green light to continue the aggression against Gaza.

Muhammad Hawash: Netanyahu's red lines and pressure to end the Gaza war, even temporarily, before Trump's visit to the region.

Dr. Amjad Abu Al-Ezz: Body language during the meeting revealed a clear lack of semblance of warmth between Trump and Netanyahu, and may indicate that the latter has become a burden.

Nihad Abu Ghosh: The Trump-Netanyahu meeting and what happened at the press conference were merely a cover for more serious issues being managed behind the scenes.

Dr. Qusay Hamid: Trump intends to visit the region within a month to discuss economic and political issues, and therefore wants to calm the atmosphere before his arrival.

Awni Al-Mashni: Netanyahu's visit to Washington highlights the extent of the differences between Netanyahu and Trump, especially on sensitive issues such as the position on Iran.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent visit to Washington saw intense discussions on the Iranian and Palestinian issues, highlighting clear differences between Netanyahu and his government and the US administration headed by Donald Trump.

In separate interviews with Al-Quds, writers, political analysts, specialists, and university professors explained that the meeting between Trump and Netanyahu revealed a contradiction in priorities between the two parties. US President Donald Trump seeks to calm the situation in Gaza in preparation for an upcoming visit to the region, while Netanyahu insists on achieving military and political gains before any agreement. The visit also revealed the growing coldness in the personal relationship between Trump and Netanyahu, with Trump insisting on imposing his own agenda, especially regarding the Iranian file and relations with Türkiye, which has reduced Israel's margin of maneuver.

They point out that Washington is attempting to manage the crisis without a regional explosion that could hamper its economic and political plans. They also assert that, in the absence of an effective Arab stance, the Palestinian situation appears to be tied to the conflict between US interests and Israeli desires, with the risks of military and humanitarian pressure on the Gaza Strip growing in the coming days.

US fears Israeli strike on Iran

Dr. Hassan Ayoub, a political science professor and expert on American affairs, says that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington came at the surprise invitation of the US administration, following reports that Tel Aviv was preparing an imminent military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.

Ayoub explains that this call stems from American concerns that the Netanyahu government might take a unilateral step in this direction, which would confuse the regional situation and undermine ongoing American efforts to launch a new negotiating process with Iran.

Ayoub points out that the administration of US President Donald Trump, since assuming his second term, has supplied Israel with bunker-busting bombs, a message Tel Aviv interpreted as a preliminary green light for military preparedness against Iran. This, he notes, is particularly true given the escalation in US operations against the Houthis in Yemen, which has strengthened the Netanyahu government's confidence in the possibility of military coordination with Washington.

Ayoub believes that through this visit, Israel sought to preempt any potential negotiations between Washington and Tehran, especially in light of Trump's contradictory positions on Iran, which range from military threats to calls for negotiations.

US-Israeli agreement on Gaza

Ayoub points out that the occupation government informed Washington that "Iran's arms" in the region have been amputated, giving it the advantage of launching a direct strike against Tehran.

However, according to Ayoub, the surprise was Trump's public statement during the meeting that "negotiations with Iran will begin soon," along with a direct request to Netanyahu not to take any unilateral steps that could thwart these efforts. Ayoub considers this a clear message to temporarily freeze the military option.

In contrast, Ayoub asserts that the Palestinian issue, specifically the Gaza Strip, witnessed complete US-Israeli consensus during the meeting, with Netanyahu receiving a "renewed green light" from the US administration to continue his war on the Strip, including implementing plans for genocide and pressuring the displacement of the Palestinian population.

Ayoub points out that Trump has made no secret of his explicit support for these policies. Indeed, his administration has completely refrained from condemning Israeli crimes in the West Bank, repeatedly affirming "Israel's right to defend itself," and even speaking within its circles of "Israel's right to extend its sovereignty over the West Bank."

Ayoub emphasizes that the US administration's policy entails complete surrender to Israel regarding Gaza, noting that the Israeli government declares that it is "implementing Trump's vision" in the Strip, without any effective Arab position to halt this escalation or change the Palestinian reality.

Ayoub asserts that the situation in Gaza is heading toward further escalation in the coming days, with the aim of pressuring mediators and forcing Hamas to accept Israeli conditions, including voluntary displacement. Meanwhile, the Iranian issue remains vulnerable to fluctuations, given Trump's unpredictable nature, which could push him to make sudden decisions at any moment.

Clear and binding political messages to Netanyahu

For his part, writer and political analyst Mohammed Hawash says that the meeting between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu included clear and binding political messages addressing three key issues, outlining a kind of US "roadmap" for Israeli engagement in the coming period. This comes amid ongoing attempts to contain the escalation of the war in the Gaza Strip, albeit temporarily, ahead of Trump's anticipated visit to the Middle East.

Hawash explains that the first message was a direct request from Trump to Netanyahu to end the war on Gaza and reach an agreement that guarantees a conditional, rather than a completely open, ceasefire. This reflects America's desire to stop the war as a prelude to presenting political initiatives consistent with its regional interests.

The second message, according to Hawash, related to the Syrian issue, where Trump stressed the need for Israel to refrain from targeting sites in Syria that could lead to a direct clash with Turkey, referring to Turkish influence in the north of the country. Trump clearly told Netanyahu, "Erdogan is my friend, and you must resolve your problems with him directly," which was understood as a warning against entering into uncalculated confrontations with Ankara.

The third issue, according to Hawash, was the Iranian file. Trump informed Netanyahu of imminent negotiations with Iran, beginning next Saturday in the Sultanate of Oman, albeit indirectly. These negotiations are part of an American attempt to reach understandings that include halting Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and redrawing Iranian influence in the region by weakening its regional allies.

Trump's message to Iran's Supreme Leader

Hawash points out that Trump did not disclose the content of the message he sent to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, but its general content aims to contain Iran's nuclear ambitions and limit its regional expansion.

In a related context, Hawash points out that Trump's personal envoy to the Middle East, Witkoff, attended the meeting with Netanyahu after cutting short his visit to Qatar, indicating the importance of the Palestinian issue.

Hawash points out that Witkoff is carrying a new proposal for Gaza, which partially overlaps with an Egyptian initiative. Washington is seeking to secure the release of the Israeli hostages first, while Israel, for its part, is seeking to circumvent the second phase of the ceasefire agreement, with the aim of continuing the war without a declaration and maintaining pressure on Hamas.

Hawash asserts that Netanyahu is trying to circumvent Arab and international initiatives, but he cannot cross the red lines drawn for him by Trump.

Hawash believes the US administration views a ceasefire in Gaza as a necessary step to ensure the success of Trump's upcoming visit to the region, during which he seeks to expand economic and security partnerships with the Gulf states, Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority.

Hawash points out that Saudi Arabia, in particular, has demanded a clear path to ending the occupation and establishing a Palestinian state, but Israel remains the only party ignoring these demands.

Hawash believes that American pressure may push Netanyahu toward greater flexibility regarding Egyptian and Qatari proposals, and that we may witness a de-escalation before Trump's visit, demonstrating relative stability that will enable American political and economic gains in the region.

This may be Netanyahu's last visit to Washington.

In turn, Dr. Amjad Abu Al-Ezz, writer, political analyst, and professor of international relations at the Arab American University, said that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent visit to Washington and his meeting with US President Donald Trump revealed a major shift in the relationship between the two sides. He noted that "this visit may be Netanyahu's last" to the United States, given the internal and external challenges he faces and his declining standing with his American allies.

Abu Al-Ezz explains that body language during the meeting revealed a clear lack of rapprochement between Trump and Netanyahu, suggesting that the latter has become a political burden on Trump.

Abu al-Ezz points out that numerous indicators indicated that Trump did not respond to most of Netanyahu's demands during the meeting, particularly regarding the Iranian issue and Israeli relations with Türkiye.

Regarding Turkey, Abu Al-Ezz explains that Trump was decisive in maintaining his strong relationship with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, refusing to sacrifice it to please Netanyahu. He explicitly advised him to resolve outstanding issues with Turkey through dialogue, calling for an end to Israeli media incitement against Ankara, a key US ally in the region.

Regarding the Iranian issue, Abu al-Ezz asserts that Washington ignored Netanyahu's repeated requests to have Tel Aviv become a direct partner in negotiations with Iran. Washington announced the start of new negotiations with Tehran unilaterally without consulting Israel, which he described as "a clear marginalization of the Israeli voice," especially given the inclusion of sensitive issues such as ballistic missiles and Iran's regional alliances on the negotiating agenda.

End the war and receive a destroyed Gaza!

Abu al-Ezz points out that Trump insisted on prioritizing diplomacy over Iran, avoiding any military escalation. This contradicts Netanyahu's approach, which was pushing for a military option.

Regarding Gaza, Abu al-Ezz explains that Trump wants to end the Israeli war on the Strip, but within a specific American vision that calls for "receiving a destroyed Gaza," which would allow for control of the territory and the expulsion of its Palestinian residents, followed by attracting international investment to transform it into an economic project.

Abu al-Ezz suggests that there may be an undeclared agreement between Trump and Netanyahu that would give the latter additional time to achieve his military objectives in Gaza before the war ceases. According to Abu al-Ezz, this demonstrates a US double standard in rhetoric between what is said publicly and what is being planned behind the scenes.

Abu al-Ezz explains that US President Donald Trump has begun to grow restless about the ongoing war on the Gaza Strip, considering it a burden. He points out that international pressure, particularly the joint phone call between Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Trump during a summit in Cairo with the Jordanian monarch and French president, contributed to pushing Trump to take a stand against the continuation of the war.

Four main issues, the most dangerous of which is the future of Gaza

For his part, writer and political analyst specializing in Israeli affairs, Nihad Abu Ghosh, says that the meeting between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and the subsequent public press conference, were merely a cover for more serious issues being addressed behind the scenes, particularly those related to the Palestinian issue, Iran, and Turkey.

Abu Ghosh explained that the meeting focused on four main issues, the most prominent and critical of which was the future of Gaza, along with prisoner issues, the war on the Strip, the Iranian nuclear issue, relations with Turkey, and the issue of the customs duties imposed by the United States on Israel.

Abu Ghosh asserts that Israeli plans are still being implemented intensively to achieve the goal of forcibly displacing Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, noting that Trump has not backed down from his policy of supporting this plan, but has instead reaffirmed his vision of Gaza as a "free zone," but one "devoid of Palestinians."

Abu Ghosh explains that Israel has halted all implementation of the "deal" or previous agreements and has reorganized its policies to implement the displacement plan. The declared objectives of the war, such as "eliminating Hamas" or "liberating prisoners," have become mere pretexts to justify the larger goal of emptying Gaza of its population.

Abu Ghosh points out that the Israeli plan is not limited to Gaza, but extends to the West Bank, through the displacement of refugee camps, the division of the West Bank into separate enclaves, and the annexation of more land, particularly in the "Greater Jerusalem" project, which aims to expand settlements from Ma'ale Adumim to the Red Sea.

Trump seemed more inclined toward negotiations with Iran.

Abu Ghosh notes that Netanyahu had hoped that Trump would adopt Israel's tough stance toward Iran, by striking or dismantling nuclear facilities, or imposing strict controls even on peaceful uses of nuclear energy. However, this would be an "instrument of surrender" that Iran cannot accept.

Abu Ghosh points out that Trump seemed more inclined toward negotiations with Iran, rather than military pressure, especially since Tehran has adapted to the blockade and will not accept giving up its nuclear program without concrete guarantees.

Abu Ghosh believes the military option remains a possibility, especially given Trump's unpredictable personality. However, Abu Ghosh believes this option would be costly for the United States, as it could threaten its interests in the region and destroy the prospects for billions of dollars in economic deals with Iran.

Abu Ghosh explains that the Turkish issue has become a source of concern for Israel, particularly with the rise of Turkish influence in Syria and the tense relations between Ankara and Tel Aviv. Israel is seeking to exploit American pressure on Turkey to dissuade it from expanding its influence in Syria, especially since Israel has ambitions in the occupied Syrian territories and seeks to impose its hegemony over southern Syria, transforming it into a region similar to the West Bank, where everything entering and leaving it is controlled.

Customs duties issue

However, Abu Ghosh notes that Trump's comments about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan were more "complimentary" than Israel had anticipated, which may indicate that Washington will not adopt an overtly hostile stance against Ankara.

Abu Ghosh notes that the issue of tariffs was one of the reasons Trump summoned Netanyahu, as the United States wants to impose tariffs ranging from 0% to 50% on Israeli exports, while Israel refuses to reduce the current 17% tariff.

Abu Ghosh explains that Israeli exports to the US are not ordinary products, but rather mostly technological and military supplies that serve American industries. This makes negotiations on this issue complex, even though it is considered the least dangerous compared to the Iran and Gaza issues.

Abu Ghosh points to the Arab vacuum in confronting Israeli plans, as there is no unified Arab plan to support the Palestinian cause, only ineffective summit statements.

Abu Ghosh asserts that the only option left for Palestinians is to persevere and hold onto their land, emphasizing that surrender is not a realistic option and will not save Gaza from Israeli schemes.

"What can save Gaza is Palestinian unity and Arab and international pressure to respect international law," Abu Ghosh says. "But if that fails, we will face our fate bravely, because we have no other options."

Trump-Netanyahu meeting focused on Iran and Gaza

For his part, Dr. Qusay Hamed, a professor of political science at Al-Quds Open University, explained that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's meeting with US President Donald Trump involved two main issues: Iran and the Gaza Strip, along with secondary issues.

Hamed asserts that both issues are priorities, but Netanyahu considers the Iran issue more urgent than the Gaza issue, despite his continued military action against the Gaza Strip.

Hamed explains that there is an American-Israeli consensus to keep the military option on the table regarding Iran, but there is a difference in the order of priorities between the two sides. Trump sees the diplomatic option as the preferred path, and seeks to ensure that this path is long and does not lead to a direct military confrontation. Trump also believes that war with Iran is not necessary at the present time, given his focus on his global economic battle related to raising tariffs.

Hamed believes that Trump believes that launching military strikes against Iran at this stage could distract him and hamper his economic priorities, so he prefers to wait on the military option. Netanyahu, however, believes that the diplomatic option will not bear fruit until a military strike is launched, and that such a strike could create a better negotiating environment for the United States and Israel. This has prompted him to try to persuade Trump to prioritize the military option over the diplomatic one.

Hamed believes that Trump will not agree with Netanyahu's vision at this sensitive stage.

Agreement to end Hamas' presence in the Gaza Strip

Regarding the Gaza Strip, Hamed explained that there is agreement between Washington and Tel Aviv on the ultimate goals, which include ending Hamas's presence in the Strip, preventing its return to power, and disarming the Palestinian resistance. However, the disagreement lies in the method of implementation. Trump prefers to address the Gaza issue through diplomatic means or through regional mediators, rather than engaging in a direct military confrontation.

Hamed points out that Trump views the ongoing Israeli war on Gaza as an obstacle to his plans to attract more Arab countries to normalization agreements with Israel, particularly Saudi Arabia. According to Trump, the war could complicate negotiations and provoke anger among the Arab public, especially given the worsening humanitarian situation and the lack of any prospect for a solution in Gaza.

Hamed points out that Trump intends to visit the Arab region within a month to discuss economic and political issues, most notably restructuring the region and promoting Arab normalization with Israel. He is therefore keen to calm the situation before his arrival.

Hamed explains that, in contrast, Netanyahu is racing against time to establish new facts on the ground that will enable him to accelerate the implementation of a plan aimed at gradually displacing Gaza's population, in parallel with a military escalation against Hamas and the economic and humanitarian pressure on the Strip's residents.

Hamed asserts that this strategy, while formally aligned with Trump's vision for ending the war, is being implemented under Israeli conditions that establish a reality on the ground that serves Netanyahu's vision, including removing Hamas from the scene and disarming the resistance.

A clear moment of confrontation between America and Israeli interests

In turn, writer and political analyst Awni Al-Mashni says that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington and his meeting with President Donald Trump were not a traditional visit, falling within the usual context of political courtesy. Rather, they represented a clear moment of confrontation between US priorities and Israeli interests, resulting in a shift in the nature of the traditional relationship, which had been based on Washington's absolute support for Tel Aviv.

Al-Mashni explains that the visit revealed the extent of the disagreement between Netanyahu and Trump, particularly on sensitive issues such as the position on Iran. Trump appeared to have chosen a strategy that primarily reflects US interests, which also intersects with Iran's orientations, which, in turn, seeks to avoid a military confrontation.

According to Al-Mashni, what Washington is currently doing is using escalation against Iran as a negotiating tool within the "brinkmanship" policy, with the goal of reaching an agreement without resorting to war, because war is simply not a current American priority.

The Turkish role in Syria

Regarding the Turkish role in Syria, Al-Mashni asserts that this issue has also been a point of contention between the two sides. The United States views Turkey as a strategic partner within NATO, while Israel views the growing Turkish influence in the region as a threat to its interests, once again reflecting the diverging agendas between Washington and Tel Aviv.

Regarding the war on Gaza, Al-Mashni points out that Trump is adopting a position similar to that of Egypt, which is to seek a ceasefire that prevents Hamas from remaining in power in the Strip.

Al-Mashni believes that this approach does not necessarily conflict with Israel's interests as a state, but it contradicts Netanyahu's personal calculations, as he continues to seek political gains from the continuation of the war.

Al-Mashni points out that the visit was devoid of pleasantries and clearly reflected America's bias toward its own interests. This demonstrated Israel's complete subservience to American decisions, while simultaneously narrowing Netanyahu's political maneuvering space, particularly in his domestic battle, as he is no longer able to convince the Israeli public of his ability to extract gains from Washington, as he had previously done.

Al-Mashni asserts that Netanyahu has become a burden on Israeli policy, given the exposure of his limited tools for obstruction, while the US has a clear vision and ultimately imposed its priorities.