Academic Paper: Israel’s Position on the US–Iran Nuclear Negotiations: Determinants and Dimensions (Arabic)

Reading Time: 3 minutes

By: Sameh Singer.
(Exclusively for al-Zaytouna Centre).

Al-Zaytouna Centre has published an academic paper by Sameh Singer, in Arabic, titled “Israel’s Position on the US–Iran Nuclear Negotiations: Determinants and Dimensions.”

Since the onset of the nuclear talks between the US and Iran, Israel has been engulfed in a storm of internal debate. One camp argues that the Iranian nuclear file should be left in the hands of the US, sufficing with urging Washington to consider Israeli demands during negotiations and to pressure Iran into making broader concessions. Another group believes that Israel should merely play the role of a “threatening whip” to strengthen Washington’s negotiating stance. A third current, however, calls for an immediate military strike against Iran’s nuclear program. Israel ultimately resolved this internal debate by launching a military strike on Iran under the codename Operation Rising Lion, on 13/6/2025.

The operation followed Israeli diplomatic efforts led by Netanyahu to persuade Washington to reject any agreement permitting Iran to retain any level of uranium enrichment. This stance was reflected in the US position during the negotiations, especially after the involvement of a high-level Israeli delegation, including Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer and Mossad chief David Barnea. The Trump administration ultimately adopted Israel’s “red line” demanding zero uranium enrichment by Iran. The military operation received full backing from the Israeli opposition, while estimates from within the ruling coalition suggest that Netanyahu may leverage the operation’s results to bolster his political standing and potentially call for early elections.

The paper indicates that the primary driver of Israel’s position on Iran’s nuclear program is its desire to maintain exclusive control over nuclear weapons in the Middle East and to prevent Iran, or any other state, from acquiring them. Israel’s nuclear monopoly has become a cornerstone of its national security doctrine and plays a central role in reinforcing its policies of dominance, expansion, aggression and regional hegemony. This monopoly also bolsters its standing as the most powerful regional actor. Furthermore, Israel views Iran as a strategic enemy and perceives its nuclear program as an “existential threat” to its survival, fearing that if Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, it might use them directly against Israel.

At the conclusion of the paper, the author raised questions about the future of Israeli policy toward Iran, asking whether Israel truly intends to intervene every time Iran attempts to redeploy a rocket-launching platform at one of its bases. Will it carry out military action in response to every Iranian effort to rehabilitate enrichment facilities or move closer to developing a nuclear weapon?
The author argues that the US and Israel currently share a common view on the need to curb Iran’s ambitions. However, doubts remain about whether this close coordination will endure in the long term, and whether US positions on Israel’s freedom of action in Iran will remain unchanged, especially in light of potential political shifts in the US in the coming years or changes in its international priorities.