The Trump Netanyahu meeting at the White House on Feb. 11, 2026, comes as Washington tests a new diplomatic channel with Tehran and Israel presses to shape what any U.S.-Iran agreement would cover.
President Donald Trump has said Iran “very much wants to reach a deal,” but he also warned of tougher action if diplomacy fails, according to remarks reported by Axios.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, before departing Israel, said he would present Israel’s “principles of the negotiations,” describing them as essential for Middle East security. The Trump Netanyahu meeting is also expected to include Gaza, where progress on a U.S.-backed postwar framework has stalled, according to Reuters and the Associated Press.
Iran diplomacy resumes with Oman as go-between
The Trump Netanyahu meeting follows indirect U.S.-Iran talks held in Oman on Feb. 6, 2026, with Omani officials serving as mediators. Iran’s foreign ministry has described that session as a way to gauge Washington’s seriousness and decide whether to continue the diplomatic track, according to Reuters.
U.S. officials have presented the talks as an attempt to prevent Iran from advancing toward a nuclear weapon while also reducing the risk of another regional war. Iran says its nuclear work is for peaceful purposes and has said it is open to discussing nuclear limits in exchange for sanctions relief, Reuters reported.
The agenda remains the main dispute. Iran has indicated it wants discussions restricted to the nuclear file, while the Trump administration has signaled it wants a broader package that includes missiles and regional security issues. That divide is likely to shape what the Trump Netanyahu meeting produces, especially on whether Washington narrows its demands to keep talks moving.
Military pressure remains part of the U.S. posture
Trump has paired diplomacy with visible military pressure in the region. Reuters has reported the United States has increased its naval and air presence near Iran in recent weeks, a posture U.S. officials describe as deterrence and leverage for negotiations.
In media interviews leading up to the Trump Netanyahu meeting, Trump repeated his warning that if Iran refuses an acceptable agreement, the United States could take “something very tough” action. Reuters also reported Trump said he is considering sending a second aircraft carrier strike group to the region.
Israel views U.S. force posture as relevant to any negotiating outcome. Israeli officials have argued that a deal perceived as weak could allow Iran time to rebuild capabilities damaged during the June 2025 conflict, when U.S. and Israeli strikes hit Iranian nuclear sites during a 12-day war, according to Reuters.
Iran has warned it would retaliate if attacked. That risk, combined with the ongoing talks, is one reason the Trump Netanyahu meeting is expected to focus on what the United States would accept, and what Israel would consider sufficient for its security.
Missiles and proxies are Israel’s key demands
Netanyahu’s core message in the Trump Netanyahu meeting is expected to be that a nuclear-only deal is not enough. Israeli officials want the United States to press Iran on ballistic missiles and on support for armed groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, Reuters and AP reported.
Trump has signaled some alignment with that view. Reuters reported Trump told Fox Business that a “good deal” would mean “no nuclear weapons, no missiles,” though he did not provide details on how missile limits would be negotiated or verified.
Iran has rejected linking missiles to the nuclear talks. Reuters reported Ali Shamkhani, an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, said on Feb. 11, 2026, that Iran’s missile capabilities are “non-negotiable.” That public stance makes missiles a direct obstacle to the kind of broader agreement Israel says it needs.
Israeli analysts say the missile issue is not simply a negotiating preference but a strategic threshold. A deal that lifts sanctions while leaving Iran’s missile production and stockpiles untouched could, in Israel’s assessment, reduce economic pressure on Tehran while preserving a conventional threat that can expand quickly. Israeli officials have also expressed concern that diplomacy could limit immediate nuclear risk while leaving intact the means to pressure Israel and U.S. forces through conventional strikes or proxy conflict.
A counterargument, raised by some diplomats and arms-control advocates, is that adding missiles and proxies can turn talks into an all-or-nothing package. A narrower nuclear agreement, they argue, could reduce near-term proliferation risks even if other disputes remain unresolved. That approach can also make verification more straightforward. The Trump administration has not publicly committed to either framework, and the Trump Netanyahu meeting is expected to clarify how much flexibility Washington has on scope.
