Israeli and regional assessments say Washington expects diplomacy to fail but wants to avoid an energy crisis and an unpopular war before November, while rebuilding interceptor stocks and preparing for a broader confrontation later.
U.S. President Donald Trump has settled on an Iran strategy for the coming months, according to assessments by officials in Israel and other Middle Eastern countries, as reported by Ron Ben-Yishai for Ynet.
Trump said this week that the United States would strike Iran forcefully following its missile attack on Jordan, and the U.S. military carried out extensive strikes in Iran overnight. Yet those strikes were confined to the Persian Gulf region, and according to Ynet's analysis, Trump appears intent on avoiding a major escalation.
A Calculated Pause, Not a De-Escalation
Officials cited by Ynet say Trump does not want a broad confrontation or a sharp deterioration in the fighting before the U.S. midterm elections in early November. The concerns are threefold: avoiding a global energy crisis, preventing U.S. gasoline prices from rising above $4 a gallon, and sidestepping a war that remains politically unpopular among American voters.
There is also a military calculation behind the pause. According to the report, the roughly three months remaining before the elections would allow the United States to accelerate production of munitions — particularly interceptors — and make other preparations for a wider confrontation expected to resume later.
Washington has concluded that diplomatic efforts with Iran's new regime will not succeed — neither on reopening the Strait of Hormuz nor on preventing Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
The assessments described by Ynet indicate that Washington has already concluded diplomacy with Iran's new regime will not produce results, whether on reopening the Strait of Hormuz or, more significantly, on preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The implied conclusion is that another major military confrontation will be required, with Israeli participation.
The Legal Clock on Trump's War Powers
A key constraint shaping the timeline is legal. Congress authorized Trump in April to continue a military operation — not a war — for 60 days. That authorization now requires Trump to maintain a pause, or at most low-intensity fighting, in order to avoid having to seek congressional approval for a prolonged war. The political stakes of that approval are rising: Congress could become considerably more difficult for Trump to manage after the midterms, with the Republican majority itself at risk.
Blockade Over Bombing: The Pentagon's Read
According to the report, the Pentagon and U.S. Central Command have assessed that airstrikes in their current form have exhausted their capacity to pressure the Iranian regime. By contrast, the maritime and economic blockade is viewed by Washington as an effective lever — and a genuine threat to the regime's ability to govern and meet the population's basic needs.
U.S. intelligence officials cited in the analysis say Iran's military and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps have been unable to pay salaries for several months because of lost oil revenue. Iran is also experiencing repeated power outages, and the rial continues to fall against the dollar.
Signs of internal strain are becoming visible. The report cites a hunger strike by roughly 1,500 death-row prisoners at a jail near Tehran, along with protests by taxi drivers and merchants. Executions have also accelerated recently, including of individuals who took part in the major protests in January — a further irritant fueling opposition to the regime, even as the protests themselves remain limited for now.
Iran's Proxies and the Push for Escalation
U.S. and other Western officials have concluded that intense military action would merely allow Tehran to divert public attention from domestic hardship, according to the assessments. Washington's preferred course is therefore to maintain — and potentially expand — the economic blockade, even at the cost of keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed.
Iran, for its part, appears to have recognized this American approach and is trying to drag Washington into a wider confrontation, calculating that U.S. military casualties and higher gasoline prices could force Trump into a ceasefire on Tehran's terms. To that end, the report says, Iran is activating proxies including the Houthis in Yemen and Shiite militias in Iraq. It is also possible Tehran is pressing Hezbollah to escalate in Lebanon — a dynamic the report links to a recent explosive-drone strike on an Israeli military engineering vehicle.
The Netanyahu Meeting: Strategy, Not Operational Detail
These strategic determinations, according to Ynet's sourcing, were made before Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington this week. Trump's willingness to meet Netanyahu stemmed partly from the fact that Washington had already finalized its decisions — meaning the president could not later be accused of bending to Netanyahu's pressure.
The report notes that Netanyahu had angered Trump by leaking to The Wall Street Journal information about thousands of centrifuges being moved to the Pickaxe Mountain facility — a disclosure that damaged Trump's credibility after he had claimed Iran's nuclear facilities were destroyed. Trump's frustration surfaced publicly this week when he asked why Netanyahu was discussing the matter in public rather than telling him directly. Compounding this, a politically influential wing of the Republican Party is pressing for a harder line on both the Strait of Hormuz and the nuclear issue, and the leak reportedly made Trump appear weak.
Two additional factors led Trump to proceed with the meeting regardless, according to the analysis: Netanyahu's cabinet decision enabling progress on the Board of Peace's 20-point plan for Gaza, including deployment of an international stabilization force between the Yellow Line and Hamas-controlled territory; and the calculation that Trump may still need Netanyahu even if Likud loses Israel's upcoming election. Since the U.S. midterms fall roughly a week after the Israeli vote, a new Israeli government would likely not yet be formed — leaving Netanyahu as caretaker prime minister and, potentially, Trump's partner for launching any major campaign against Iran at that stage.
The Ynet analysis characterizes the Netanyahu meeting as focused on establishing general strategy rather than settling operational details, pointing to its length and broad agenda covering Lebanon, Syria and the Houthis, the number of participants, and the absence of a private one-on-one session — which would have avoided any suggestion of undisclosed side understandings.
What Comes After November
According to the report, Netanyahu likely views the meeting as a success: he secured a joint photograph and a White House statement describing the talks positively, useful ammunition against claims of a rupture with Trump during Israel's election campaign. More substantively, the framework Trump presented broadly aligns with Israel's own objectives.
Trump made clear he would not relent until certain that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons and that its enriched uranium has been transferred to the United States — without specifying how or when. It was also made clear that any decisive action would come after the midterm elections, when Trump, unable to seek another term, would have greater latitude to act. In the meantime, Israel's defense establishment is positioned to prepare, gather intelligence and build capabilities for what it regards as the decisive confrontation with Iran still to come.
The open question, the analysis concludes, is whether Iran — directly or through its proxies — will succeed in disrupting that timeline before November.
Photo: Gemini
Source: Ron Ben-Yishai, "Trump's Iran strategy: avoid major war before midterms, prepare for the next round," Ynetnews, July 30, 2026.