Shifting Dynamics in US-Israel Relations Amid Ongoing Iran Conflict

The ongoing conflict between the US and Iran has revealed significant rifts in the alliance between the US and Israel. As Operation Epic Fury unfolds, differing objectives and strategies have emerged, particularly regarding military operations and the stabilization of the global oil market. With key advisors expressing concerns and resignations occurring, the future of this partnership is uncertain. This article delves into the complexities of their relationship, the implications of their diverging paths, and what it means for the broader Middle Eastern landscape.

By Narendra Chaudhary Mar 21, 2026, 15:26 IST

Operation Epic Fury: A New Chapter in Middle Eastern Tensions

Launched on February 28, 2026, Operation Epic Fury marked a significant escalation in the conflict involving the United States and Israel against Iran. The two nations coordinated strikes aimed at Iran's nuclear facilities, military leadership, and missile programs. Within hours, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, was reported dead. However, as the weeks progressed, the unity between the US and Israel began to show signs of strain, revealing a complex divergence in their strategies.

Three advisors to President Trump indicated to Axios that he may seek to conclude major military operations before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu does. Joe Kent, the director of the US National Counterterrorism Center, resigned, citing moral objections to the ongoing conflict. While US and Israeli military forces have been operating in tandem, their objectives have started to diverge significantly.

The most evident split arose from Israel's attacks on Iranian oil storage facilities. The US has prioritized stabilizing the global oil market, urging Israel to refrain from further strikes without explicit approval from Washington. A White House official remarked, "Israel doesn't hate the chaos. We do. We want stability. Netanyahu? Not so much, especially in Iran."

Trump publicly instructed Netanyahu to halt attacks on Iranian oil and gas sites, stating, "I told him, don't do that." This came after Trump claimed the US was unaware of an Israeli strike on the South Pars gas field, the largest natural gas reserve globally. However, an Israeli source contradicted this, asserting that the attack was coordinated with the US, highlighting a significant operational disagreement within the alliance.

Former US Ambassador to Israel, Daniel Shapiro, noted the growing divergence in objectives, suggesting that Israel aims to weaken the Iranian regime further, potentially leading to its collapse. He warned that if Trump opts for a unilateral ceasefire, Israel may struggle to continue its operations in Iran as they currently stand, given the high level of coordination required.

Israel's ambitions appear more expansive than those of the US. Mahjoob Zweiri, director of the Gulf Studies Center at Qatar University, stated that Israel views the current conflict as part of a broader strategy to reshape the region following the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. Israel's goal is to eliminate any potential threats, including Iran.

In contrast, the US has focused on degrading Iran's nuclear capabilities and military assets, which it is reportedly achieving. This difference in end goals complicates the alliance, as the US can declare its mission complete, while Israel's objectives remain ongoing.

Trump's inconsistent messaging has further muddied the waters. Richard Fontaine, CEO of the Center for a New American Security, remarked that the current strategy lacks clarity, posing risks regarding the objectives and the timeline for achieving them.

Typically, short conflicts arise from decisive military advantages and clear political goals, yet these conditions are absent in the current situation. Israeli leaders have expressed skepticism about the timeline for degrading Iran's military capabilities, suggesting that sustained operations will be necessary.

Chuck Freilich, a former Israeli deputy national security adviser, noted a worrying shift in Trump's commitment to regime change in Iran, indicating a growing rift between the two nations. This rift is becoming increasingly apparent in decisions regarding oil strikes, ceasefire timelines, and differing definitions of victory. While the US and Israel initiated this conflict together, the manner in which they conclude it will significantly shape the future of the region.