Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took a strong stand against Iranian energy coercion on Friday, declaring that the Strait of Hormuz could not remain a hostage to Tehran’s geopolitical ambitions and calling for urgent construction of alternative pipeline routes. He combined this strategic vision with a military announcement, declaring that Iran had lost all uranium enrichment and ballistic missile production capabilities after twenty days of conflict. Netanyahu rejected claims about Israeli manipulation of US foreign policy throughout the press conference.
The prime minister described his relationship with Trump as historically unprecedented in its closeness. He framed Trump as the alliance’s dominant force and rejected the idea that Israel had pushed the American president into the conflict. Netanyahu revealed that Trump had brought his own independently developed understanding of Iran’s nuclear threat to their discussions, contributing insights that enriched their shared strategy.
Netanyahu confirmed Israel struck the South Pars gas compound alone and acknowledged Trump’s personal request to hold off on further strikes on Iranian gas facilities. He handled both facts with transparency, framing them as natural elements of a close and communicative alliance. Netanyahu maintained throughout that Israel’s operational independence remained fully intact.
On the Hormuz infrastructure question, Netanyahu proposed overland pipeline routes from the Arabian Peninsula to Israeli and Mediterranean ports as a permanent solution to maritime dependency. He argued this would create lasting energy resilience and permanently neutralize one of Iran’s most powerful geopolitical weapons. Netanyahu framed this proposal as a central element of the post-conflict regional order he intended to help build.
Netanyahu concluded with observations about Iran’s leadership chaos. He noted Mojtaba had not appeared publicly and admitted he was unsure who was governing the country. Netanyahu pointed to the fierce competition for power in Tehran and concluded that this instability, combined with military losses, was driving the conflict toward a faster-than-expected conclusion.