Trump rebukes Netanyahu at G7 over Lebanon conduct
The US president publicly warned his closest ally that Israel's campaign in Lebanon is casting a shadow over the Iran deal, a rare open rift between Washington and Jerusalem as the summit closes.
- At the G7 summit, Trump said publicly that he is not satisfied with how Israel is treating Lebanon and Hezbollah.
- He warned that Israel's campaign casts a negative shadow over his Iran deal, which he calls the big deal.
- The president denied that the US would put any money into Iran.
- It marks a rare open rift between Washington and Jerusalem as the summit winds down in Evian.
For Serbia, which has spent decades balancing between Washington and its own ties across the Middle East, and whose diplomatic offices track every shift in American policy toward Iran, the sight of a US president publicly scolding his closest ally is no ordinary signal. Donald Trump did exactly that in the closing stretch of the G7 summit in Evian, France, opening a rare rift between Washington and Jerusalem that is usually settled behind closed doors rather than in front of the world’s cameras.
Trump said he was not satisfied with the way Israel is dealing with Lebanon and Hezbollah, adding that in his judgment the Israeli side should have finished the job faster. The message to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was unmistakable: the leader in Jerusalem must be more accountable when it comes to Lebanon. The words landed at a moment when the American president is trying to defend what he describes as his greatest foreign policy achievement, the deal with Iran.
Why is Trump turning on his closest ally in public?
The geopolitical calculus behind the rebuke is clearer than it first appears. Trump warned that the conflict with Hezbollah casts a negative shadow over the agreement with Iran. The big deal, as he calls it, is the accord with Tehran, and any escalation on the Lebanese front threatens to gut it before it can show results. The president, in other words, has concluded that Israel’s campaign in Lebanon is costing him more than it is gaining, and he decided to say so out loud.
It is a move with risk. At home, Netanyahu faces part of the public and officials who judge the Iran deal itself as a bad one, even as a lifeline thrown to the Tehran regime. In that climate, a public rebuke from Washington adds further strain to a relationship between two leaders who for years presented themselves as close allies. Anticipating the objections, Trump explicitly denied at the summit that the United States would put any money into Iran, trying to cut off the loudest criticism before it could gather force.
European capitals are watching this rift with particular attention. For governments that have long insisted on a diplomatic channel toward Tehran, American willingness to reach an agreement marks a shift, but the uncertainty over Israel’s reaction injects a fresh dose of nervousness. The allies gathered in Evian are trying to gauge how far Trump is prepared to press Jerusalem, and whether this is a one-off outburst or the announcement of a more lasting turn.
What does this rift mean for the close of the summit?
Trump is wrapping up the G7 summit facing skepticism at home and jitters among allies in Europe. His plan to end the war with Iran, which he presents in Washington as a historic success, has been met with reservation both within parts of the American public and among partners unsure of the arrangement’s durability. The open rebuke of Netanyahu complicates the picture further, showing that even the firmest alliance is not immune to friction when competing priorities collide.
For Jerusalem, the message from Evian means that backing from the White House is no longer the unconditional certainty it seemed in earlier years. For Tehran, it may signal that Washington intends to defend the agreement it has secured, even at the cost of friction with Israel. And for observers in Belgrade and the wider region, watching how the great powers position themselves around the Middle East, the spectacle confirms that the axes of power are shifting faster than official statements admit.
The question that remains open concerns the price Trump is willing to pay for his deal. Does a public rebuke of an ally mark the start of a more lasting realignment of American policy in the Middle East, or is it a moment of tension that will be smoothed over the instant the cameras switch off? How far do you think Washington is prepared to go to preserve its agreement with Iran?
