Betrayal, American Style: Humiliating Israel Becomes Trump's Main Tool of Diplomacy

Washington deliberately excluded Israel from the process of shaping agreements with Iran in order to demonstrate the White House's foreign-policy independence, according to Andrey Koshkin, head of the Department of Political Analysis and Socio-Psychological Processes at Plekhanov Russian University of Economics.

Speaking to Pravda.Ru, the expert analyzed the reasons behind what he described as the growing isolation of one of America's key allies in the Middle East.

Earlier reports indicated that the Israeli government had requested access to a memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran that is scheduled to be signed in Switzerland on June 19. However, Israeli authorities were reportedly denied access and still do not possess the full text of the document.

U.S. President Donald Trump previously stated that he intends to read the agreement word for word during a special press conference, although the timing of its publication remains unclear.

Growing disagreements between allies

According to Koshkin, the current situation is the result of increasingly public disagreements between the two allies. He argued that the United States is seeking to reinforce its status as the sole leader of the diplomatic process while pushing regional partners into secondary roles.

At the same time, the analyst expressed doubts that any agreements reached would prove durable in the current political environment.

"The United States and Israel entered this conflict together, but disagreements and mutual complaints later emerged between them. The turning point came when Trump first declared support for Israel and then changed his position, saying that the United States had made an independent decision. Since then, he has consistently sought to demonstrate that America acts independently,” Koshkin said.

He added that there are serious concerns that Israel could become a source of future destabilization if it perceives a threat to its national interests.

Questions over the future of the agreement

The political analyst argued that Washington's approach reflects a strict hierarchy in which control over the document remains exclusively in the hands of the principal actor.

Even if personal guarantees are provided by the American president, Koshkin believes the risk of violations remains high due to the volatile nature of the conflict. While diplomats prepare for negotiations, strikes against critical infrastructure continue, raising questions about the practical implementation of any future memorandum.

"The United States, through Trump, is assuming responsibility and guaranteeing that all conditions will be fulfilled. But in today's dynamic and aggressive world, the process of negotiating and signing such an agreement does not inspire confidence that it will be fully implemented. Most likely, violations will occur, and, as practice has shown, Israel could become the catalyst for such violations,” the expert said.

The situation has been further complicated by what some observers describe as Israel's declining ability to influence negotiations taking place in Europe. Analysts note that concerns have emerged in Jerusalem over what they see as a changing American approach toward Tehran.

Against the backdrop of behind-the-scenes negotiations, Washington is also reassessing the format of its relations with regional partners. Some observers believe the White House may impose stricter conditions on future security cooperation, while others view the current diplomatic activity as an attempt to buy time, arguing that a peace agreement could serve as a tool for managing public attention rather than a long-term solution.