Converging U.S. and Israeli signals suggest the Trump administration is keeping a channel open to what it describes as a potential new Iranian leadership, while Israel’s political and security discourse is increasingly framing the current campaign as an opportunity to end the Iranian regime or weaken it decisively.
The Associated Press reported that Trump signaled readiness to negotiate with Iran’s new interim leadership, with military operations continuing in parallel.
Detail
• Fox News: A senior White House official said a potential new Iranian leadership has reached out to Washington seeking talks with Trump, and that Trump intends to engage soon while military operations continue.
• Associated Press: Trump signaled willingness to negotiate with Iran’s new interim leadership as strikes continue.
• Ynet: Bezalel Smotrich was quoted as saying Israel has entered an “existential campaign” to topple Iran’s regime and remove an existential threat, citing close coordination with the United States.
• Reporting attributed to IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir described the campaign as unprecedented and aimed at dismantling capabilities that constitute an existential threat.
• Reuters: Yair Lapid called for destroying Iran’s nuclear and ballistic capabilities and toppling the Iranian regime, describing Iran as an existential threat.
• JNS, citing Defense Minister Israel Katz, reported that the war will not stop before objectives are achieved, linking this to the possibility that Iranians could remove the regime from within.
(Analysis) Back-channel mediation and Washington’s terms versus Israel’s trajectory
Diplomatic sources said undisclosed mediation efforts over the past two days have explored a communications channel between figures inside the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Trump administration. According to the sources, Washington’s preliminary framework would require:
• Any future Iranian government to abandon the nuclear program.
• Tight limits on the ballistic missile program.
• An end to support for Iran’s regional proxy networks.
• In return, Washington would not oppose the formation of a government acceptable to the IRGC, alongside a gradual lifting of sanctions.
The same sources said this track does not reflect Netanyahu’s approach and that of his allies, whose public messaging increasingly treats the current campaign as a chance to end the regime or weaken it permanently.
What next?
• Whether Trump’s signals translate into an official channel via a regional mediator, or remain political messaging alongside continued operations.
• Whether Washington’s negotiating ceiling converges with Israel’s escalatory ceiling, or an overt divergence emerges over the campaign’s end-state.
• Any public indicator from Tehran of a delegation, mediator, or acceptance of a conditions-based framework will shape the coming week.
