Trump Acknowledges Calling Netanyahu ‘Crazy’ Amid Fragile Iran Ceasefire Talks

President Donald Trump confirmed he referred to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as “crazy” during a recent phone call, telling a media outlet he was “a little bit perturbed” by the Israeli leader’s continued military operations in Lebanon. The acknowledgment comes as diplomatic efforts to secure a lasting agreement with Iran face new complications from regional military exchanges.

Trump stated that Iran has not left the negotiating table and that a deal could be imminent. He said Iran has agreed to one of his central demands: a commitment not to develop a nuclear weapon. Iran has long maintained its nuclear program is for civilian purposes, a claim disputed by international observers given its enrichment of uranium to 60%. According to Trump, an agreement includes provisions for international inspectors to access and destroy stockpiles of highly enriched uranium, referred to as “nuclear dust.” The International Atomic Energy Agency recently warned of the dangers posed by Iran’s inventory of near weapons-grade material.

Tensions were further tested when U.S. forces launched self-defense strikes following Iranian missile and drone attacks targeting Kuwait, including its airport. The Pentagon confirmed strikes on an Iranian military ground station near the Strait of Hormuz, which remains closed. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers the blockade is depriving Iran of hundreds of millions of dollars in daily revenue. During a contentious House hearing, Rubio faced sharp questioning from Democrats, at one point deflecting criticism about unrelated personal matters.

In a significant but largely symbolic legislative move, four House Republicans joined Democrats to pass a War Powers resolution aimed at curtailing U.S. military action against Iran. The measure now advances to the Senate, though it faces an almost certain presidential veto if it reaches Trump’s desk.

Ben Friedman, policy director for Defense Priorities, analyzed the situation, describing the current state as a “limited ceasefire” with significant gaps. He noted that the ongoing blockades and counter-blockades constitute acts of war under international law, and that recent Iranian strikes on Kuwait appear designed to increase pressure on the Trump administration to reach a deal. Friedman suggested that both sides are “negotiating with weapons,” but warned that a major escalation in U.S. military response would be counterproductive to diplomacy.

Regarding the reported friction between Trump and Netanyahu, Friedman expressed that his primary concern was not a deterioration in U.S.-Israel relations, but rather that the closeness might prevent the U.S. from effectively urging Israeli policy adjustments. He indicated that a potential Iran deal likely requires a more robust ceasefire in Lebanon than Israel has been willing to accept, which may have been the subject of the leaders’ tense call. While Trump expressed anger, Friedman questioned whether the President explicitly leveraged U.S. aid as pressure during the conversation.

On the future of U.S.-Israel ties, Friedman suggested that regardless of leadership changes, Washington may increasingly recognize divergent strategic interests. He pointed to comments from figures like Senator JD Vance as indicative of a potential long-term shift toward a more conditional partnership.

Friedman outlined a potential path forward: a limited agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, deferred talks on nuclear restrictions, and a mechanism to unfreeze some Iranian assets—possibly through a third party like Qatar—to allow the U.S. administration to claim it did not directly transfer funds. He acknowledged that even with a deal, practical hurdles like clearing naval mines and ensuring shipper security would delay the full resumption of oil traffic.

When asked about a breaking point in negotiations, Friedman noted that while soaring oil prices could increase political pressure, the President has publicly dismissed such concerns. For Iran, the economic stakes are severe, but nationalistic sentiment following attacks may increase its capacity to endure hardship. The coming days, Friedman suggested, will hinge on whether the Trump administration chooses to finalize a limited deal already on the table or continues to seek more comprehensive terms.