In a development that has sent ripples through diplomatic circles, a phone call between former US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been described by sources as ‘crazy’, threatening to unravel the fragile consensus among Western allies on Iran. The conversation, which took place late last week, has reportedly reignited tensions over the approach to Tehran’s nuclear programme, with Trump allegedly pressing for a more aggressive posture that diverges sharply from current Biden administration policy.
According to officials briefed on the call, Trump urged Netanyahu to escalate military planning and public rhetoric against Iran, advocating for strikes on nuclear facilities. This stance contradicts the ongoing diplomatic efforts led by the US and European powers to revive the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), from which Trump unilaterally withdrew in 2018. Netanyahu, who has long opposed the JCPOA, appeared receptive, raising concerns in London, Paris, and Berlin that Israeli actions could provoke a wider conflict.
The implications are significant. The Western alliance has been labouring to present a united front, balancing deterrence with diplomacy. Trump’s intervention, even as a private citizen, undermines that effort. European diplomats fear that Netanyahu may now feel emboldened to conduct covert operations or escalate strike campaigns in Syria, risking a direct confrontation with Iranian forces and Hezbollah. Meanwhile, the Biden administration is scrambling to contain the fallout, with Secretary of State Antony Blinken scheduling emergency calls with his European counterparts.
From a climate of geopolitical instability, the prospect of a military confrontation in the Middle East carries immense risks. Beyond the humanitarian cost, such a conflict would disrupt global energy supplies at a time when nations are already grappling with price volatility linked to the war in Ukraine. Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20% of the world's oil passes. Any escalation could push oil prices beyond $150 per barrel, triggering a recession and derailing investments in renewable energy transitions.
This crisis underscores a fundamental tension in Western strategy: the inability to reconcile the objective of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran with the imperative of avoiding a devastating war. The JCPOA was a technological solution: verified inspections and uranium enrichment limits. Its collapse, driven by the Trump administration’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign, has left the region in a precarious balance. Iran now enriches uranium at 60%, close to weapons-grade, while its proxies have expanded their reach. The current administration’s approach, combining diplomacy with sanctions, has slowed but not reversed progress.
Netanyahu’s vulnerability to far-right coalition partners, who demand action against Iran, further complicates matters. Trump’s call may have been an attempt to reinsert himself into global affairs, but it risks catalysing a chain reaction: Israeli strikes, Iranian retaliation via proxies, and a US forced to intervene. The biosphere, already under strain from climate change, cannot afford another conflict.
What is needed now is calm urgency. European leaders must reinforce the diplomatic track, offering Iran tangible economic incentives in exchange for nuclear compliance. Simultaneously, they must pressure both Israel and the US to maintain strategic restraint. The alternative is a war that would dwarf the human and ecological toll of Iraq and Syria combined. The planet’s warming makes resource competition more acute; we cannot afford to add barrels of burning oil to the atmosphere.
History will judge whether this phone call was a mere aberration or the spark that unravelled decades of non-proliferation efforts. The data is clear: without a renewed commitment to diplomacy, the odds of a cascade failure in the Middle East’s stability increase exponentially. The time to act is now, before the first missile flies.
