He said the conversations were “IN DEPTH, DETAILED, AND CONSTRUCTIVE” and would “CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE WEEK” but was scant on more details.

Netanyahu soon voiced optimism about the possible deal despite being known for pursuing maximalist demands in the war with Iran.

“President Trump believes that there is a chance to leverage the massive achievements of the IDF and the U.S. military in order to achieve the goals of the war through an agreement — an agreement that protects our vital interests,” the prime minister said in a video address.

The pronouncements soon sent shockwaves around the world, with many speculating that the war could be on the verge of ending as soon as it had begun, or that it signaled Trump was bending to Iranian pressure on the global economy.

Several experts speaking with the Washington Examiner voiced heavy skepticism of these perspectives; however, most speculated that the rhetoric was a diplomatic ploy or ruse. Professor Kobi Michael, senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies and the former head of the Palestinian desk at the Israeli Ministry for Strategic Affairs, argued that Trump’s actions painted a different picture.

“We don’t have to take too seriously all the declarations that are made by President Trump,” Michael said. “I think that we have to follow the deeds of President Trump. Not the sayings of President Trump, but the deeds of President Trump.”

He argued that Trump seems to have a full grasp on the strategic situation and that the U.S.’s goals won’t be accomplished if the war ends without a decisive Iranian defeat. If Iran is able to win with the upper hand, it would be able to reconstitute its ballistic missile, nuclear, and proxy capabilities, resulting in “a huge shame” for the United States.

Lt. Col. Sarit Zehavi, founder and president of the Alma Research and Education Center and a 15-year Israeli military Intelligence Corps veteran, also urged caution.

“I learned as a researcher to be very careful with assessing what Trump and [Netanyahu] are planning,” she said. “We were surprised in many, many different directions. If you look at, on the one hand, everything that was happening just before the two campaigns against Iran, on the other hand, the ceasefire in Gaza and the agreement, the amazing agreement that was gained there. So I don’t know what kind of magic will be made this time.”

Research Fellow and Middle East expert Zineb Riboua, at the Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East Hudson Institute, has noted Trump’s penchant for saying and doing different things during times of conflict.

“Sometimes, Trump’s statements are not about the ‘thing’ itself, more about the signal he wants to send to the market, because as far as I can tell, the operation is ongoing with full force,” Zineb noted shortly after Trump made his Monday announcement about negotiations. “He wants total regime change. And he said so for months now.”

Michael argued that new military deployments show the president is gearing up for further escalations and that his diplomatic maneuvering is intended primarily to build the case for the war in the eyes of the U.S. public.

“I believe that what President Trump does now is trying to maneuver, to calm the cats, on the one hand, to build legitimacy, domestic legitimacy, mainly that by showing that he gives the chance for a diplomatic path, that he is willing to negotiate with the Iranians and to peacefully reach an agreement,” he said.

“But at the very same time, we continue building military capabilities,” Michael said. “We heard about the 82nd [Airborne] Division that is on its way to the region, about the Marines that are on their way to the region. And other squadrons of aircraft are on their way to the region, which means that President Trump believes that the negotiation might fail as it failed previously.”

Aside from Trump and Netanyahu’s rhetoric, the public demands the U.S. has made are far from what Tehran looks willing to accept. A former senior Israeli intelligence official noted the immense gap between Washington’s and Tehran’s demands, voicing skepticism that it could be bridged.

Riboua suggested that the only deal Trump would be willing to accept is one where Tehran caves to all his demands and ends the war in a highly weakened position.

“From my perspective, a deal for Trump is a deal where Iran is just absolutely weakened, and we’re getting there, actually,” she said. 

The intensity of the air campaign could allow Trump to reach the objective of a heavily degraded Iran, whether a deal is struck or not.

LEBANON WITHDRAWS IRANIAN AMBASSADOR’S DESIGNATION AND GIVES HIM DAYS TO LEAVE

“You can see it in their own attacks, very sporadic, not coordinated,” Riboua said. “But also, more Arab countries are putting pressure. They’re talking about also joining. … That hints that Iran is much more isolated, that they don’t have many options left, other than to submit to Trump’s demands.

“And I think that this is the situation ideally the United States wanted to find itself in,” she said. “And whether it means we’re going to get a deal or not, I think it just shows that the operation is reaching its objectives.”