Washington and Jerusalem may not share exactly the same war aims. At the start, both countries appeared united in weakening Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. However, recent statements and military actions indicate that their war aims and long-term priorities may be starting to diverge.
Joint Military Operations Show Strong Cooperation
In the early days of the conflict, the United States and Israel worked closely together. Military planners from both countries coordinated operations and shared intelligence on targets across Iran as part of their early war aims. Their air forces carried out large-scale strikes that damaged much of Iran’s air-defense network. This allowed fighter jets from both countries to operate more freely in Iranian airspace. American aerial refueling aircraft also helped Israeli jets complete long-distance missions by providing fuel midair.
Israel had spent more than two decades preparing for possible long-range strikes against Iran’s nuclear program. Many Israeli officials had expected such preparations to support their long-standing war aims against Iran’s military capabilities. However, many did not expect these operations to take place alongside the United States in such a coordinated campaign.
The close cooperation became especially visible on March 6. Israeli Air Force commander Major-General Tomer Bar personally flew an F-15 during a strike mission. While some officers viewed the move as unusual for such a senior commander, others saw it as a symbolic act tied to years of preparation and Israel’s broader war aims in confronting Iran.
Different Political Goals Begin to Appear
Despite strong military cooperation, differences in political goals between the United States and Israel have begun to emerge during the war with Iran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long warned that Iran’s leadership and nuclear ambitions pose a serious threat to Israel. Recently, he has spoken openly about the possibility of regime change in Iran. His remarks suggest that Israel’s war aims may include creating conditions that allow the Iranian people to “take their destiny into their own hands.”
The American president appears to have a somewhat different approach. While he has demanded Iran’s unconditional surrender, his statements suggest he may prefer a leadership change within Iran’s existing power structure rather than a complete collapse of the regime. This difference in tone has raised questions among Israeli officials about whether Washington’s war aims match Israel’s expectations.
Experts identify Tomahawk near Iranian school amid debate over responsibility
Some analysts believe the United States may be focusing more on limiting Iran’s military strength and maintaining stability in global energy markets rather than pushing for full regime change. Oil exports are a key factor in this calculation, as Iran supplies significant amounts of crude to countries like China despite sanctions. Israeli officials also suspect that influence over Iran’s oil supply could play a role in America’s broader war aims, especially in global geopolitical negotiations.
First Signs of Disagreement Over US and Israel War Aims
The first clear signs of tension between the allies appeared after a major Israeli strike on fuel tanks in Tehran on March 7. The attack targeted large energy storage facilities in the Iranian capital. Reports said American officials were unhappy with the scale of the strike, raising concerns that such actions could disrupt oil supplies and increase economic instability.
Energy markets had already been shaken by rising oil and gas prices during the conflict. When the American president later suggested that the war was nearly complete, financial markets quickly calmed. In an interview on March 9, he said the war was “pretty much complete,” but later added that victory had been achieved in many ways, though not fully. The mixed messages appeared aimed at reassuring investors worried about global energy supplies.
Iran detains dozens of alleged spies linked to US and Israel amid ongoing regional tensions
The reaction to the Tehran strike raised questions about whether the United States and Israel share the same war aims in the conflict. Some Israeli analysts warn that a prolonged war could increase risks, as Iranian missile attacks continue to threaten Israeli cities and tensions with Hezbollah in Lebanon remain high.
Meanwhile, Iran’s security structures, including the Basij and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, remain largely intact despite ongoing strikes, while political pressures continue to shape decisions in Israel.