When Washington talks to Tehran, Israel is not in the room. That fact—more than any declaration of alliance—defines its true position.

Reports of renewed or exploratory contacts between Donald Trump and Iranian interlocutors revive a question Israel has yet to confront with sufficient clarity: is it a partner in shaping outcomes, or an actor expected to absorb them?

The language of alliance offers an immediate but incomplete answer. The United States and Israel remain deeply aligned, but alliances do not eliminate hierarchy—they organize it. And in moments of great-power diplomacy, hierarchy reveals itself through exclusion. Israel may be aligned with the United States, but it is not co-equal in shaping the terms of engagement with Iran. When negotiations begin—formal or informal—Israel is not present. It is, at best, consulted; at worst, informed after the strategic contours have already been defined. This is not a procedural nuance. It is the boundary of influence.

What follows is a persistent asymmetry between responsibility and authority. Israel bears a significant share of the operational burden in countering Iranian expansion—through intelligence, deterrence, and, when necessary, direct or indirect action—yet it lacks corresponding authority in the diplomatic arena where outcomes are ultimately determined. The rhetoric of partnership obscures a more functional reality: Israel acts; the United States........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)