U.S. President Donald Trump’s overnight post calling for the dismissal or pardon of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s corruption trial did not emerge in a vacuum. While some may interpret the message as a personal show of support or political friendship, regional observers say it is part of a broader, possibly coordinated strategy aimed at reshaping the Middle East’s political landscape, with Netanyahu playing a key role.
Since announcing the U.S.-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Iran, Trump has grown increasingly impatient with Israel—particularly over the prolonged fighting in Gaza. His vision, by his own repeated accounts, includes ending the war, securing the release of hostages and fast-tracking normalization with Saudi Arabia as part of a wider expansion of the Abraham Accords across the Middle East and possibly beyond. Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, hinted as much Wednesday, saying a deal with Hamas was “closer than ever.”
5 View gallery
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Doanald Trump
(Photo: MENAHEM KAHANA/Pool via REUTERS)
Within that context, Trump’s intervention in Netanyahu’s legal woes could be seen as part of a "package deal": public and potentially practical support for the Israeli leader in exchange for Netanyahu’s cooperation in ending the Gaza war and advancing U.S.-led regional goals. Some analysts speculate this is only the opening move in a wider diplomatic campaign yet to be revealed.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid alluded to such a possibility Thursday in an interview with Ynet, saying, “With all due respect to Trump, he should not interfere in a legal process in a sovereign country. My guess is that this is compensation, because he’s going to pressure Netanyahu to end the war in Gaza. That’s typical Trump.”
Other opposition lawmakers were also skeptical of Trump's motives. "Netanyahu is so ‘innocent’ he recruits Trump to cancel his trial," said MK Naama Lazimi of The Democrats Party. "This post shows how an entire nation is held hostage by a criminal defendant. Netanyahu, release your chokehold on Israel’s democratic regime. One man’s corruption cannot destroy Israeli society. Enough."
Fellow Democrats member MK Gilad Kariv invoked Jewish tradition: "No one is above the law—not even a prime minister. We enshrined this in our Jewish-democratic state."
Israel Bar Association Chairman Amit Becher defended judicial independence: "Israel’s judiciary answers only to law, Israeli jurisprudence and the state’s foundational values."
Meanwhile, Netanyahu's allies were more receptive to the American leader's comments. Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee Chairman Simcha Rothman said Trump's words reflected "profound truth," though he stressed: "It is not the U.S. president's role to intervene in Israel’s legal affairs. Judicial independence is vital—even for Netanyahu." He instead urged President Isaac Herzog to grant Netanyahu a pardon: "Give this nation justice and moments of quiet and grace."
Culture Minister Miki Zohar added: "Trump is right—it’s time to cancel this trial." Speaking to Army Radio, he asserted Netanyahu’s trial was "perhaps the worst thing to happen to Israel in recent years"—less than two years after the October 7 massacre.
Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi echoed: "While I’d love seeing Netanyahu crush this political prosecution in court, this spectacle has long cost us national security."
Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, a former Netanyahu critic, questioned the trial’s value: "What purpose does continuing it serve? How many more years? Will any Israeli change their view of Netanyahu based on conviction or acquittal? Does this insistence serve ‘rule of law’ or the unwritten ‘Law of Persecution’?"
National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir concurred with Trump, calling the trial "absurd" and demanding "urgent judicial reform." Coalition whip Ofir Katz dismissed it as a “sham trial" disconnected from reality, while Social Equality Minister May Golan labeled it a "delusional witch hunt" and "political injustice."
Trump’s comments also reverberated in the diplomatic arena. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, visiting Soroka Medical Center in Be’er Sheva following an Iranian missile strike, did not rule out possible U.S. pressure on Israel’s judiciary.
“I serve at his pleasure. And if it's his pleasure to say something, it’s my pleasure to be happy that he did it,” Huckabee told Ynet. “It’s refreshing to have a president that speaks his mind... I’m happy to see that my president and the leader of my country and the free world is a person that has led with conviction and clarity.”
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee comments on Trump post calling to drop Netanyahu trial
Asked whether it constituted excessive interference, he responded: “I think the president has a right to say whatever he wishes to say. He’s the president of the United States.”
Attorney Marc Zell, chairman of Republicans Overseas Israel and vice president & general counsel of Republicans Overseas Inc., said:
“I am a staunch supporter of Prime Minister Netanyahu and believe that the legal proceedings against him are baseless and politically motivated—which is likely why President Trump issued such a strong statement criticizing the prosecution. After all, the Democrats in the U.S. did the exact same thing to him.
"That said, Israel is a sovereign country. Its judicial system—for all its flaws—is solely its own responsibility. While the President of the United States is entitled to express his opinion, he must not interfere in ongoing legal proceedings in Israel. Doing so could set a very dangerous precedent. Likewise, Israel should not interfere in judicial processes taking place in the United States.”
Beyond geopolitics, there is a personal dimension. Trump, facing his own legal challenges, appears to see Netanyahu as a kindred spirit—another leader targeted by what he perceives as politicized legal systems. He has repeatedly framed himself and Netanyahu as members of a global movement pushing back against what he calls “judicial persecution.”
5 View gallery
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Doanald Trump in the Oval Office
(Photo: Kevin Dietsch/GettyImages)
Trump’s worldview is built around spheres of influence. Russia rules its domain, China its own and the United States—Israel included—operates under his. In Trump’s eyes, Israel is firmly within the U.S. sphere of influence and is therefore expected to align with his directives. That outlook may now put Netanyahu in a difficult position: does he embrace Trump’s public support or distance himself to assert Israel’s independence?
On Tuesday, just a day before his controversial post, Trump urged Israel to halt its military actions in Iran following violations of the ceasefire. He reportedly initiated a direct call with Netanyahu, described by U.S. sources as “particularly firm and blunt.” CNN’s White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins reported that Trump told Netanyahu he must “do everything possible to prevent the collapse of the ceasefire.”
Is Israel’s judicial system being treated like The Hague?
Given Trump’s track record, it is hard to rule out a scenario in which his comments go beyond mere rhetoric. He imposed personal sanctions on judges at the International Criminal Court—including its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan—and took unprecedented actions against international bodies he viewed as hostile.
Now, Trump could attempt to exert pressure on Israel’s judicial system through legal, political or even reputational levers. For instance, he might direct U.S. authorities to suspend cooperation with Israel’s prosecution on Netanyahu-related cases.
On the other hand, this may be purely a rhetorical gesture. Israel is a rule-of-law country, and no foreign president can halt domestic legal proceedings. Still, Trump could initiate a political, public or even constitutional process that could eventually lead to a pardon for the prime minister.
Under Israeli law, a pardon can only be granted after legal proceedings conclude—but the current security context, especially following the successful U.S. strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, could render a pardon politically feasible. President Herzog recently indicated that he would consider such a request favorably if it were submitted.
What remains unclear is whether Trump acted independently or in coordination with Netanyahu. If this is part of a coordinated effort, the public deserves to know what Netanyahu must deliver in return.
Does it require an immediate end to fighting in Gaza? A full hostage deal? Or is halting legal proceedings the final link in a broader geostrategic chain spanning from Tehran to Riyadh? Time will tell. One thing is already clear: Trump's statement is not just a personal gesture toward a prime minister he favors—it is part of a much larger strategic game.