A fracture has emerged between the United States and Israel — and it's now playing out in public. For three weeks, the war in Iran has unfolded, but only today have both countries begun openly briefing against each other. The dispute centers on whether President Trump knew about Israeli attacks on Iranian gas fields.
The fires broke out at the South Pass gas field yesterday after Israeli air strikes hit that crucial installation. Those attacks on Iran's energy infrastructure led predictably to Iranian retaliation. Last night, Iran targeted energy infrastructure across the Gulf — most significantly including a missile strike against Qatar's Rasafan complex, which supplies a fifth of the world's natural gas.
The Financial Times called the attacks on Qatar an Armageddon scenario for gas markets.
According to a report from Axios, the US had approved Israel's attack. The report quoted Israeli officials who said the strike was coordinated with and approved by the Trump administration. A US defense official confirmed this narrative.
However, after Iran hit back at Rasafan and other sites in the Gulf, Trump distanced himself from Israel's actions. This was his message on Truth Social:
"Israel, out of anger for what has taken place in the Middle East, has violently lashed out at a major facility known as the South Pass Gas Field in Iran... The United States knew nothing about this particular attack, and the country of Qatar was in no way, shape, or form involved with it..."
So was the Axios report wrong? Not according to Israel. Reuters quoted three Israeli officials who reiterated that Trump did know about those attacks.
The Oil Crisis
We had a break-the-glass plan across the administration at Treasury. We unsanctioned Russian oil. We knew there were about 130 million barrels on the water and we created supply beyond the Straits of Hormuz. So we anticipated this. We knew there could be a temporary — I want to emphasize temporary — choke point, and there was 130 million barrels of floating storage.
In the coming days, we may unsanction the Iranian oil that's on the water. It's about 140 million barrels. That would have all gone to China. In essence, we will be using the Iranian barrels against the Iranians to keep the price down for the next 10 or 14 days as we continue this campaign.
That was United States Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant. His message: Iran blocking the Strait of Hormuz has created an oil shortage. Therefore, the Americans are considering lifting sanctions on Iranian oil.
With geniuses like this running the show, you can see why America's usual allies have so far refused to get involved.
European Allies' Response
Britain, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Japan released a joint statement saying this:
"We condemn in the strongest terms recent attacks by Iran on unarmed commercial vessels in the Gulf... We express our deep concern about the escalating conflict. We call on Iran to cease immediately its threats..."
But what does that actually mean? This is a desperate way for European partners to show some relevance. They bear the burden of Iranian attacks on energy infrastructure in the region, but they don't really have any tangible ways of doing anything about it. They're not explaining how they're doing it. They're also not directly responding to Trump's request for them to basically bear more of the burden of opening the straits.
At this point there isn't really a maritime escort solution that would solve the problem. I don't know necessarily that there is anything these states could offer without engaging in direct negotiation and diplomacy with the Iranians to come to some sort of agreement on freedom of passage before they would then bring in their navies to create deterrence. Without getting a freedom of passage by the Iranians, why would they go through it and risk very expensive platforms to do so?
The Question of Control
There are two options here.
The first: Americans gave a green light and the Israelis executed it. That is terrible because it shows Americans were okay with Gulf energy infrastructure — which for these countries is the center of gravity for their economic model — being targeted reciprocally, because obviously strikes by Israel on Iranian infrastructure were going to lead to response by Iran.
The second option: Americans didn't give a green light, gave a yellow light or ignored it, and the Israelis went and did it anyway. That means Americans have absolutely no control over their junior partner, which has been driving this campaign and arguably has been really pulling the Americans into a war that Trump wanted to avoid.
Critics might note that both scenarios leave Gulf states vulnerable to escalating tit-for-tat cycles with Iran — and neither provides an easy exit from this conflict. The Europeans' joint statement reflects desperation more than strategy.
Can Trump Control Israel?
In Trump's Truth Social post, he pledged that no more attacks will be made by Israel on the South Pass gas field. But can he guarantee that? Absolutely not. Trump has shown his weaknesses time and again. The Israelis have ignored his warnings time and again. The strike on Qatar in September last year is testimony to the fact that Americans cannot control Israel, despite the fact that Israel gets extensive military aid and is essentially entirely dependent on Americans.
But for some reason this White House doesn't have the sort of control ability, the strength and power to actually reign the Israelis in. And the Israelis are quite unhinged. They frame this as an existential war and they're willing at all cost to achieve whatever objective they can achieve.
The Israel Lobby's Decline
What has changed in that relationship? The Israeli-American relationship has always been somewhat special — not just over the last 10 or 20 years, but over the last 50 years. But what we've seen developing over the 1990s and 2000s is a very powerful coercive network: the Israel lobby. That lobby has found ways to compel people into silence, coercing others into following a particular line of thought, inducing others through payments to follow a pro-Israel approach.
And that Israel lobby is now currently falling apart because they're being faced with a reality and a push back from the MAGA crowd. But what we've seen since October 7th is at least in the beginning this Israel lobby had a lot of control over Biden's White House and now Trump's White House. Some of that control is fading, and we're seeing an overreaction — particularly on the liberal end where Democrats are now overwhelmingly anti-Israel, and also on the far right with the America First movement where overwhelming there's an overwhelming majority saying we America first means America first, not Israeli first.
So why did Netanyahu want to do this war now? Why did he see this as the last chance to get a war from the White House and get some buy-in? Because moving down the line another 5 years from now, Israel's influence in America is going to wane. And any Israeli politician is well aware that Israel will have to go it alone next time around.
Bottom Line
The piece reveals something unsettling: Trump is publicly trying to control Israel while simultaneously claiming he knew nothing about their attacks — and everyone knows it's not true. The strongest argument here is that this fracture exposes how little actual leverage the US has over its closest ally, despite billions in military support. The vulnerability? Both sides of this dispute leave ordinary Gulf residents caught in an escalating cycle they can't escape. Watch for whether Trump's posturing translates into actual pressure on Israel — or whether Netanyahu simply ignores it like he ignored Trump before.