Discourse around the possibility of direct negotiations between the United States and Iran has shifted from quiet channels to the public sphere amid the arrival of the Trump administration's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, in Israel on Tuesday, where he is slated to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials.
Israel is not viewing this visit as procedural but as an attempt from the Trump administration to close gaps, as well as discuss what could be considered a move in Iran negotiations Israel could accept, and what would be beyond Israel's red line.
Israeli assessments perceive that US President Donald Trump is genuinely interested in negotiations with Tehran, but not necessarily out of belief that they would solve any "Iranian problem." The driving logic behind his motives is the desire to produce a result that can be perceived and sold as an achievement, per the assessments.
However, unlike in other arenas, a deal between the US and Iran will likely not pass in Washington without Israeli consent - not because of a formal veto, but because Netanyahu is perceived, particularly within the Republican party, as a symbol of the hardline against Iran. It would, therefore, be difficult for Trump to produce a "victory image" in an Iran deal if Israel publicly rejects it.
It is likely, therefore, that Witkoff is arriving in order to clarify not what Iran would be willing to talk about, but what Netanyahu would not be willing to talk about.
In Tehran, rigid messages are being heard that indicate that central issues, including those regarding the nuclear and ballistic missile programs, will not be up for negotiation. If the US moves forward with talks, the practical meaning could be a concession on some of the demands set in the past. Israeli officials have said that if this is the line, then Israel could be left with an arrangement defined as a US achievement, but that leaves the major issues unresolved.
Even if Witkoff finds a clear direction, it may not receive a final presidential decision. Israeli officials assess that the Trump administration's working structure involves an envoy advancing, testing, and creating frameworks, and at times presenting Trump with the results after the fact, at which point, he decides whether to sign it or demand changes.
It is not far-fetched to assess that Witkoff is attempting to open a door, bringing something back to the White House to be discussed, and only then explain what was negotiated. Within a process such as this, Israel must be careful not only about the final outcome of talks, but also about how it would be sold.
Netanyahu calculating Knesset election ramifications
Another internal Israeli consideration is the upcoming elections for Knesset, which are due to occur before the end of October.
Those in the know believe that Netanyahu is not currently aspiring to a confrontation with Iran in which Trump is presented as the leader and hero, while Israel absorbs the missiles and the price on the home front. In such a reality, Trump's claimed political achievement could turn into a political burden for Netanyahu.
If a campaign leads to serious damage on the home front, Netanyahu would be the one who would bear public responsibility. Even those who believe that removing the Iranian threat justifies a price understand that the risk of a hasty move that goes too far, or no less bad, a short move that creates great noise and a thin result.
Israeli assessments, however, still indicate that Netanyahu will not rush to lay down an ultimatum. He will detail demands, reservations, possible combinations, and then Witkoff will discuss a practical proposal with the Iranians.
One factor hovers above all others - Tehran and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Israeli officials assess that he is now allowing Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to buy time and create a sense of an ongoing negotiation process, but without granting him any mandate or permission to pay a substantive price.
If so, talks could collapse quickly, not because of a technical crisis, but because of the absence of an ability to negotiate something real. When that happens, the Trump administration's negotiation team will face a clear need to explain that the problem is not the envoy, but that there is no one to talk to. That is where the next stage will begin, and it is no less dangerous than the talks themselves.