← Call Me Back - with Dan Senor
Call Me Back - with Dan Senor
As America cuts its losses, what are Israel’s options? - with Amit Segal
00:40:23
Loading summary
Transcript79 lines
- [00:00]
Dan Sonor
Over the past couple of years, Call Me Back has grown into something much bigger than we ever expected. A place for clarity, context, and honest conversations at a time when those things can seem hard to find. That's what Ark Media is all about. Building a truly independent voice, which means no one shaping what we say or how we say it. To help support our rapidly expanding operations, we created Inside Call Me Back our Members Only feed. If Call Me Back has been meaningful to you and you want to be part of what we're building, I hope you'll join us. You can subscribe@arkmedia.org or through the link in the show Notes and to our insiders. Thank you. You are listening to an art media podcast.
- [00:53]
Amit Segal
I'll say it impolitely to shut the up. That is the best option I would offer the Israelis these days. So stop talking about Iran. Stop attacking President Trump or Vice President Vance. The best service Israel can give to itself and to the US and to the chances of relaunching the effort to prevent Iran from having a nuclear program is to let these negotiations to fail. Because any other attempt, be it in Lebanon or in Iran directly, will be seen necessarily as yet another intervention of Israel in the American business.
- [01:42]
Dan Sonor
It's 2pm on Wednesday, June 24th in Israel. It's 7am on Wednesday, June the 24th, here in New York City, where Mayor Mamdani continues to steamroll through Democratic politics. It's less of a Democratic party here in New York City these days, and more like the Democratic Socialist Party. The dsa, with a clean sweep by Mamdani of his endorsed candidates for Congress, including Mamdani toppling two incumbent congressional Democrats. Last week, the United States and Iran signed a 14 point memorandum of Understanding at the palace of Versailles. A framework of that MoU, at least the version that has been in the public, leaves Iran's ballistic missile program largely untouched. It preserves its proxy network, it lifts oil sanctions and and promises billions of dollars to Tehran. The Strait of Hormuz gave Washington pause. Intensive talks to turn that MOU into a permanent accord are now underway in Switzerland with Vice President Vance leading the American delegation. Israel is not in the room, not even adjacent to the room. The Lebanon front, where Israel has continued striking Hezbollah and where Hezbollah has continued striking back, has become the single biggest threat to the talks in Switzerland IR a halt to Israeli operations in Lebanon, a precondition for any final deal. President Trump has publicly rebuked Prime Minister Netanyahu for the strikes in Lebanon, and a fragile ceasefire in Lebanon came into effect. Israel is reportedly preparing to retreat its forces from southern Lebanon. Back in Israel, according to public polls and conversations, we're all having this the Israeli public is demoralized and angry. A number of Israeli security officials are not mincing words, calling this moment we are in right now a strategic Defeat. A Channel 13 poll shows President Trump's favorability in Israel collapsing all in a matter of weeks. And Netanyahu, who staked a large part of his political legacy on this war, now appears to be stuck. Too hawkish for Washington, too soft for his own base and for the rest of the electorate. Many regard him as irredeemable. ARC Media contributor and senior political analyst for Channel 12 in Israel, Amit Segal has been tracking every turn of this story in real time. I encourage our listeners to subscribe to his newsletter because the reporting out of there, especially in recent weeks, has been excellent. A year ago, Amit accurately predicted that the US Would strike Iran's nuclear facilities. The question now is whether he's right about what comes next. As America seems to be cutting its losses. What, if anything, can Israel still do about it?
- [04:36]
Deborah Pardes
I'm Deborah Pardes, the host of Ark News Daily. What's happening in Israel and the Jewish world right now matters, but it can be hard to keep up with, let alone make sense of it all. That's why we started ARC News Daily. Every weekday morning I walk you through the most important news, give you the context you need, and let you know what to look out for next. I don't try to convince you of anything and I don't waste your time. On most days I'll be in your ears for about 10 minutes or less. Then you can move on with your day, hopefully a little bit smarter than before. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts or follow the link in the show notes. I hope to see you tomorrow,
- [05:21]
Dan Sonor
Amit. On behalf of myself and Ilon and the rest of the ARC Media team, I first want to thank you for this Crack of Dawn episode.
- [05:29]
Amit Segal
Thank you so much. My pleasure.
- [05:31]
Dan Sonor
You make us record at 6:30, we get ready for 6:30 recording. Then you say, you know, how about seven? You know, these minutes matter a lot to the ARC Media team.
- [05:40]
Amit Segal
You burned the midnight oil preparing for the podcast.
- [05:43]
Dan Sonor
Yeah, well, burn the midnight oil. Watching the election returns in the downward spiral that is today's New York City after one radical, anti Israel, anti Semitic socialist after another wins an election. But that's a topic for another day. I'll actually be I'll be providing some analysis on what happened in New York City, politics and the implications beyond New York City on Ark News Daily. So I do encourage our listeners to pop over and listen to Ark News Daily if they want to learn more. This is a topic we'll be getting deeper and deeper into. But I want to talk about these talks in Lucerne that are taking place right now. As far as you know, Amit, and according to your reporting, where do the talks stand now?
- [06:25]
Amit Segal
Okay, so the basic perception hasn't changed. The maximum Iranians are willing to give doesn't meet the minimum President Trump is willing to take, which means that one of the sides, and I leave it to the audience to make a guess who's going to be this side. So there are two options. One is that President Trump actually gives up all his demands in terms of the nuclear program, thus agreeing to something which is definitely less than even the Obama deal in 2015. The other option, which makes more sense in my opinion, is that they're not going to agree. And this comes to something even more crucial. Many Israelis and Americans alike are obsessed with the question, is it just a trick? Well, last week we said that it's not. I mean, it's not that Trump and Netanyahu are coordinated and they're mocking the audience and the Iranians while in secret they are preparing the next phase of attack. No, but there is an option somewhere in between, according to which what Trumps really need is to actually succeed in the midterms. After what we saw on Tuesday night in New York City, he wants the energy, energy prices to go down. He wants Israel to be at least forgotten for some months or weeks. And after the midterms, it's a whole new ballgame. If this is the situation, what I would expect to happen is one extension after the other when it comes to the nuclear attacks. Because even if you read into this very specific, not that good, to say the least, agreement, it deliberately speaks about stopping funding the proxies and the ballistic missile industry as a condition to the continuation of the money coming into Iran, et cetera. So if we agree on the fact that Iran is not going to let it happen, this agreement is dead on arrival. So I think extensions have the lion's
- [08:21]
Dan Sonor
share of chances before we move off of the negotiations. You said that the maximum that Iran is willing to give on the Iran talks, on the nuclear aspects of the deal do not meet Trump's minimum. I think that's what you said. Can you just say a little more about that? What is Iran willing to give that is unacceptable, that doesn't meet what Trump expects?
- [08:39]
Amit Segal
Iran is not willing to give inspection for infinity, as President Trump put it. They are not agreed to actually send uranium out of Iran. They are not willing to reduce the level of enriched uranium of the entire package of dust that they got there. They're not willing even for inspection by international inspectors. They are not willing to give almost anything when it comes to the nuclear program. President Trump's minimum, in my opinion, is at least 20 years. And there is no chance that they are going to give it to him. Especially when the sentiment in the Middle east and especially inside Iran, is that they actually defeated the United States by not losing to the US And Israel. They have actually defeated the two most formidable powers in the world in terms of fighting Iran. I'm not sure this is the proper climate for fundamentalist Muslims to make concessions.
- [09:33]
Dan Sonor
Okay, so what leverage does Israel actually have? So everything we're talking about here is what Trump wants, what Iran wants. Can they kind of meet somewhere? Can they not? And as I said in the introduction, it's like Israel's just not even part of the conversation. So is there anything Israel can do here to change the terms of what's being negotiated in Lucerne?
- [09:54]
Amit Segal
I'll say it impolitely to shut the up. That is the best option I would offer the Israelis these days. Stop talking about Iran, stop attacking President Trump or Vice President Vance. And I know that there hasn't been a single cabinet member who have actually attacked Vance or Trump. Vance didn't say the truth there. There were, however, commentators, mouthpieces, some Knesset members. The best service Israel can give to itself and to the US and to the chances of relaunching. The effort to prevent Iran from having a nuclear program is to let these negotiat negotiations to fail. Because any other attempt, be it in Lebanon or in Iran directly, will be seen necessarily as yet another intervention of Israel in the American business. That's why, in my opinion, and although there is a huge amount of criticism against the government and the idf, I do think that a ceasefire in Lebanon is an Israeli interest. Because as long as Israel is there in southern Lebanon and can protect its soldiers, it's very important to get the legitimacy to relaunch the attack if the war continues. And meanwhile, not to be the excuse that gives Iranians the explanation why they will have abandoned the negotiation table.
- [11:17]
Dan Sonor
Okay, so Iran is reportedly funneling, again, this is just reports we're seeing. We're hearing Iran is reportedly funneling IRGC officers into southern Lebanese towns to rebuild Hezbollah's command structure there. And other infrastructure is being developed. It's been reported widely and the IDF does not appear, unless we're missing things, the IDF does not appear to be fighting back. So A, is that an accurate characterization, what I just said? And B, what is Israel's plan? If what I'm saying is true, they're just going to sit back and let Hezbollah rebuild in southern Lebanon?
- [11:51]
Amit Segal
No.
- [11:52]
Dan Sonor
No.
- [11:52]
Amit Segal
So here's the thing. It's quite clear for everyone that if someone tries to shoot at you, you can actually shoot him back. It's quite clear that Israel is not allowed to attack in the Dahia. For inst. Something happens there in Beirut or northern to Beirut, Israel is not allowed, which
- [12:09]
Dan Sonor
is an area where Hezbollah. Just for our listeners to understand, the Dahya is an area where, which is much deeper into Lebanon, where Hezbollah is very strong and yet there is an understood restraint on Israel going that deep into Lebanon. It's one thing for Israel to just be right there in southern Lebanon, go deeper into Lebanon. All the way to the Dahya is considered a bridge too far.
- [12:29]
Amit Segal
Absolutely. In the twilight zone lies in the situation where you see something happening. It might be a terrorist activity or preliminary to terrorist activity, but you do not know for sure. For instance, you see a car with two males stopping half a mile from you. They cannot shoot you, but maybe they are just taking, you know, footage in order to know where you are located in order to attack you tomorrow. Can you shoot them? Can you try to do something? Can you actually destroy a truck that takes, I don't know, two suspected items that might be rockets? This is the gray area in which Israel's hands are tied as we speak. But all I know is that the number one interest of Iran is to actually create more daylight between Israel and the US that's the number one purpose. More than saving Hezbollah, more than saving Iranian officer who got stuck under the ground in the secret bunkers just behind the yellow line. The number one interest of them is to actually keep Israel isolated. And that's why Israel should not give them the excuse. It's painful, it's annoying, it's sometimes tragic, but it's worth the attempt.
- [13:42]
Dan Sonor
Okay. The likelihood of a deal emerging from these talks is low for all the reasons you've said. But it's also fair to assume that the resumption of war is just as unlikely, at least in the near term period that we're talking about here. So why would a no deal, no war outcome be bad for Tehran?
- [14:03]
Amit Segal
Because the blockade is to continue. A no deal, no war means that sanctions are not eased, not lifted and not even waived. It means that $400 million a day revenue are going to stop because the Strait of Hormuz is closed again. And that the millions of citizens who see their savings vanish because of an inflation of something like 86% a month, they necessarily are going to storm the streets. That's why it's good for Israel and bad for Iran. I think President Trump would have preferred this one, but the only thing is he couldn't be assured that the midterms will actually outlast the Iranian regime. That is to say that the Iranian regime is going to collapse before the midterms. That's why he actually eased the sanctions, signed the deal, and this is why November 2026 is going to be a very crucial moment.
- [14:58]
Dan Sonor
But, Amit, President Trump, in making the case for the current phase we are in right now with Iran, argued that if the strait didn't open. I don't remember his exact quote, but it was something along the lines of, if we don't open the strait, we could have a 1929 situation in terms of an economic or market crisis. So it seems like even the administration would say the strait not reopening. And this situation is a pretty bad situation for the US too.
- [15:25]
Amit Segal
Absolutely. No, that's exactly the question. The US could have damaged Iran a hundred times more than Iran could have damaged the U.S. however, all Iran has to do was to survive, while even a 5% economic damage are going to cost President Trump the midterms. And that's why once no one in the two sides of the pond, as Winston Chelsea once said, could assure President Trump that a blockade, no deal, no war strategy is going to oust the current regime by November. President Trump preferred to actually press the pause button and to fight another day or to blockade another day.
- [16:02]
Dan Sonor
I mean, last week you argued on Call Me Back that President Trump's drop seems to be a pretty dramatic drop in Israeli approval ratings. I mean, he went from being what I think you and I would agree, as being like, the most popular US President in the eyes of Israelis. And then there's this crash in his approval ratings. But that said, assuming President Trump's crash in popularity in Israel endures, you made the argument in a paradoxical way that could actually help Prime Minister Netanyahu if he positions himself as the one leader willing to stand up to President Trump, which is, on the one hand, that's like, seems preposterous to me because Netanyahu has invested so much in his relationship with Trump and the partnership. And, you know, this Sort of Churchill, FDR dynamic that he's projected to the Israeli public on the one hand. On the other hand, Netanyahu has a long history of very deftly using US Presidents as foils. He's actually, if you look at his some 30 years at the top of Israeli politics, he's been in an adversarial situation. It was Biden, it was George H.W. bush, it was Bill Clinton, it was
- [17:08]
Amit Segal
Barack Obama in 2017, January 21st. It was the first day in Netanyahu's very long history, even then, to work with a Republican president.
- [17:18]
Dan Sonor
Right.
- [17:19]
Amit Segal
Till then, he worked only with quite hostile presidents towards him.
- [17:22]
Dan Sonor
Now, now I mentioned George H.W. bush, actually. I mean, I want to be clear about this. Netanyahu was not Prime Minister When George H.W. president was President, however. Right. He did have a senior position in the Shamir government which had a very contentious relationship with Bush. And Netanyahu was unfairly or fairly, I don't want to get into the history of it, blamed by Secretary of State Baker at the time for having deepened the tensions between the US and Israel, even then, even when he wasn't prime minister.
- [17:49]
Amit Segal
Absolutely. So every once in a while you have a book by a former senior figurine given US administration blaming Netanyahu for this since 1988. And they keep counting. Here's the thing. We have two main examples. Example number one is Netanyahu versus Obama in 2015, when Netanyahu stands up to Obama's desire to sign the nuclear agreement with Iran. Netanyahu won the election on the basis of his Congress speech. Two weeks prior to the election, when he spoke in Congress about representing Israel, representing 80% of the people of Israel who opposed the deal, he gained political ground. But we have a different example, and this is the futile relationship with President Clinton in 1996-1999, the day after the election, Clinton in 1996, in which Netanyahu defeated the terrorists against all the odds and all the polls.
- [18:48]
Dan Sonor
And by the way, and even after it was clear President Clinton, he made clear who his preference was in that race, which was Paris, of course, he
- [18:56]
Amit Segal
organized a peace summit in Shar Am El Sheikh in order to help press his chances to get elected.
- [19:01]
Dan Sonor
Right.
- [19:02]
Amit Segal
So he called Netanyahu and told him, we tried to screw you up. We failed. Good luck. But then the fact that President Clinton was very popular in Israel and that Netanyahu had disputes with him undermined Netanyahu's chances to get reelected. And the same applied for Shamir and Bush in 1992. So what I'm trying to say is that there isn't one general rule for how to deal with presidents. What I would say that Netanyahu is not going to confront Trump. He is the only politician in Israel not to actually give any comment regarding the agreement Trump had signed. But there is a difference, a slight, gentle, subtle difference between confronting Trump and standing up to Trump. I'll give an example. I know that, you know, during the first term, Trump and Netanyahu had many, many quite vocal phone calls in various topics. But both Trump and Netanyahu succeeded in burying the hatchet. No one knew about it, or almost no one knew about it. I think this is it. People still believe, according to a poll on Channel 13 last week, that Netanyahu will better deal Iran than Eisencott and Bennett combined, which means that it's still his strongest point when it comes to the election.
- [20:19]
Dan Sonor
Okay, one other question on this topic, Amit, which is Vice President Vance's comments. To my knowledge, Netanyahu did not respond publicly to the Vice President's comments, which were very critical. How would you describe Netanyahu's relationship with Vance at this point?
- [20:36]
Amit Segal
This is the second cousin once removed of Netanyahu. He began his career walking alongside, you know, the Reagan administration, administration and then move to, you know, Bush and Trump and now it's Vance. It's a brand new Republican Party, by the way. It's brand new, but it's old as well because we know this isolationist sentiment in the Republican Party. To be honest, I don't think that President Vance and Prime Minister Netanyahu are going to work together. The chances that Vance becomes president and Netanyahu is still prime minister are less than 20%. That's my guess.
- [21:13]
Dan Sonor
Yeah, but Amit, Amit, but here's the thing. As we both know, Prime Minister Netanyahu is very hands on in dealing with senior administration officials, whether they're president or not in any administration. In fact, as a couple of his advisors pointed out to me in recent weeks, some of the disconnect over the last couple of weeks and some of the tensions that have heated up between the Prime Minister and President Trump is partly because Bibi is single handedly running the US Desk for the Israeli government. He's the only one. He's dealing with Trump, he's dealing with Vance, he's dealing with Hegseth, he's dealing with Rubio, he's dealing with Radcliffe. I mean, he's, especially since Dermer's been gone, he doesn't have the kinds of arms and legs. I mean, he's got Leiter in Washington, but other than that, he doesn't have the real arms and legs that he has had historically to manage Washington. So he's doing all this by himself or a lot of it, which means he's dealing with Vance.
- [22:03]
Amit Segal
Absolutely. No, I think there are two explanations. I'll give you Netanyahu's explanation and my explanation. Netanyahu believes that his problem is in the Oval Office and not in the Vice President's office in the White House. This is Netanyahu's explanation. My explanation from a political perspective is that Vance has. There was a very important sentence said by Trump. It was allegedly a joke. He said, if it's going to fail, I'm going to blame Vance for it. I'm going to blame J.D. for that. Now, he knows that this is his legacy, this agreement. Now, who are the enemies? Who are the rivals when it comes to this agreement? Two. You have two rivals. One, Israel. Second, the most pro Israel faction within the Republican establishment. That's why he went very sarcastically against Israel. I think that Vance's attack on Israel and the very pro Israel wing within the Republican Party was a grave mistake because the whole idea in primaries is not to be an enemy of someone. It's about beauty, context, not boxing match in the primary. So once Vance is perceived as anti Israeli, and especially if we take into account the fact that Rubio is probably going to be his rival and he's very pro Israeli, why would you piss off more than 50% of the Republican Party? But that's only my assessment.
- [23:28]
Dan Sonor
Well, that's interesting. I mean, to the extent that there is this tension between Washington and Jerusalem right now, as articulated quite intensely by Vance, what you're saying, Amit, is that from Netanyahu's perspective, it's not Netanyahu's fight with Vance. Let it sort itself out in the. In Republican primaries in the future, no matter what the Republican primaries Look like in 2028, there probably will be a voice, whether it's Rubio. I'm more skeptical that it'll be Rubio, but someone it'll be. There'll be someone that's staking out a position in what is otherwise a very pro Israel Republican party in Republican primaries. And Vance will have to deal with it then. So let events take their course. The one thing I would say, though, Amit, is I've been in conversations where people ask more than once, do they think there's a real genuine hostility towards Israel from Vice President Vance? Does Vice President Vance harbor a real deep hostility to Israel. I've seen this come up a lot and I've also seen Netanyahu and people around him knock it down. They say assertively, no, I mean there are disagreements, there are strong disagreements, but people trying to read into Vance's heart, if you will, when it comes to Israel or the Jewish community, it seems like Netanyahu and the people around him go out of their way.
- [24:42]
Amit Segal
Absolutely.
- [24:43]
Dan Sonor
And I don't believe this is just them trying to be diplomatic. It seems they feel like, particularly during, in June, by the way, in June of last year, Netanyahu says that he worked very closely with Vance and since then he has worked very closely to Vance. So it's not like there was this flare up between Vance and Israel over the last couple weeks. And that was the only data point we have that there's been a lot, you know, Netanyahu and the people behind him have, have invested a lot of time behind the scenes working with Vance. Again, I don't want to characterize or try to evaluate what they're saying one way or the other. I am just struck that this is what they have been saying for some time. Cuz there have been these concerns for some time about Vance. They have been playing them down. So I think that they genuinely believe that Vance doesn't have this visceral hostility to Israel. And assuming we take them at their word, which I do, I do wonder if the last couple of weeks have changed their view.
- [25:31]
Amit Segal
Not necessarily. The impression is that. I can tell you it's not only their impression is that it's not that Vance is anti Israeli or anti Jewish. It's just a different approach to the Middle east and to what alliances mean in the 21st century. So for them, Vance represents the challenges of the future, not the nightmare scenarios that the best day assessment they can give you.
- [25:57]
Dan Sonor
We'll be right back.
- [26:00]
Daniel Hartman
Hi, I'm Daniel Hartman, President of the Sholem Hartman Institute in Jerusalem. And I'm Yossi Klein Halevi, senior fellow at the Sholem Hartman Institute. What's more important? To be feared by your enemies or morally true to yourself? Should Israel strive to be a nation among nations? Or should it accept the fact that it is now a fortress apart? What do Israelis and Diasporas Jews owe each other? If you're Jewish or a friend, an ally? These questions have been gnawing at you these past few years. For some of you, like for us, these questions have been keeping you up at night. And for some they've been simmering in the background, waiting for answers. But dilemmas don't always have clear answers. What they do deserve are honest and respectful debates. And as it happens, Yossi and I love to challenge each other to get to the bottom of things. We look at current events through a lens that speaks to us most deeply, a Jewish lens. So if today's Jewish dilemmas are on your mind, tune in to our conversation on For Heaven's Sake, a partnership between ARC Media and the Sholem Hartman Institute. You can find For Heaven's Sake on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. See you there.
- [27:14]
Dan Sonor
And we're back with Amit Segal. All right, so I want to come back to this question of America seeming to cut its losses, which is really what we set up in the beginning of this conversation when I talked about in the intro, what are Israel's options at this point? Like, give me actionable scenarios. You know, here we are on June 24. Now, I take your point that right now the most important thing, if F is advising anyone in Israel, it's to shut up, lay low, let events play out. That's fine, but that is very passive. It is very un Israeli. So in a world in which Israel's leadership feels like we can't just sit back here and watch, we need a plan. Right? That plan may not be very direct and public action right now in the moment while the negotiations are going on, but we need a plan. What are some possible scenarios that are actionable?
- [28:03]
Amit Segal
Okay, so let's take a broader look, please. Until a year ago or a year and a half ago, the entire situation with Iran was merely Israeli. Yes. Various US Presidents articulated through the years the message that Iran is never going to have a nuclear weapon. And all the options are on the table. No one believed it because the table in the Oval Office was empty. So the peculiar situation is the situation from June 2025 to June 2026 in which Israel even can take into its considerations the cooperation, the military cooperation with the United States of America. Now back to square one, when Israel is from a military perspective alone. So Israel still got some tools when it comes to fighting Iranians nuclear program. Now, in terms of the nuclear program, Israel is in a way better situation than it was a year and two weeks ago before the Rising Line operation. Because the enriched uranium is deep under the ground and because the ballistic missile industry lies in ruins and because something like 40 nuclear scientists are dead and they do not have any substitute yet. So what was achieved is no small feat. And what comes next depends on Israel heavily. The efforts focus on two things from a military perspective, I think Iran must now take into account the fact that no matter what they do with their nuclear program, Israel will attack. Because when Israel attacked in June 2025, it was still not pledged by United States to attack the nuclear facility in Fordot. So Israel acted alone. And it's quite clear for everyone that it will act again, especially after the fear barrier collapsed last year after we saw that it was an asymmetrical war, but from the good side of those asymmetrical wars. So this is number one. Number two is way more complicated. And this deals with toppling the regime. That was the unspoken unofficial purpose or goal of this roaring line operation. And it failed. It failed due to various things. I'm going to write about it on Friday in my newsletter.
- [30:13]
Dan Sonor
You're going to write why you think the regime did not fall.
- [30:15]
Amit Segal
Yeah. The entire efforts of the Israeli military establishment, billions of shekels and I guess billions of dollars as well from the United States are focused in shaking the very foundations of the Iranian regime. Now, if this agreement ends up when in six months from now, the Iranian economy is still in a grave situation and yes, they got something like $25 billion, but it's not even the tip of the iceberg when you take into account the $300 billion damage from this very war. So the situation in the streets of Tehran is going to be different, I think. I don't know if you ever paid a visit to the Mossad headquarters somewhere in central Israel. I don't know how it looked in the past. I guess it looked quite mysterious when they focused on killing bad guys abroad. Nowadays it reminds me more and more a very vibrate high tech company in Tel Aviv. The place is bursting in the seams now. One of the things that they do is through a new division in the Mossad. I don't know if I'm allowed to say the name, but the new wing that was founded by the former head of Mossad, Daddy Barnea, is fully focused on a regime change, on influencing the public. And I guess it's going to get more and more funding in the next few months.
- [31:40]
Dan Sonor
Okay, I want to come back to influencing the public in Israel. If President Trump were to try to play a role in this election in a disciplined way, not in a just popping off, complaining about Bibi in interviews with U.S. reporters. But if he would actually try to have some kind of program the way Clinton did to try to help boost Perez the way Obama did to boost. Who was he trying to boost? Bougie Herzog. Right. I think he was trying to help Herzog against Bibi.
- [32:10]
Amit Segal
Absolutely.
- [32:11]
Dan Sonor
That is the more common pattern we've seen. What exactly could that look like? Imagine the news story we're covering months from now is President Trump intervened in the Israeli election in favor of Netanyahu or against him? Against Netanyahu. Wow.
- [32:25]
Amit Segal
That is going to be crazy. Let's imagine. Okay. Let's just, you know, let's go wild.
- [32:29]
Dan Sonor
Yeah.
- [32:30]
Amit Segal
So Trump makes a call to one of his favorite reporters saying that Netanyahu sucks and he disappointed him and it's time for him to go. And the entire reason for Trump to try and force President Herzog to pardon Netanyahu was because he thought it would be a good end to bring Netanyahu's career to a respectful end, and that he thinks that Gadi Eisencott is a good guy. He likes this general interesting look. It's not going to help Eisencot in the way it's going to severely damage Netanyahu unless Trump's attack.
- [33:07]
Dan Sonor
Why?
- [33:07]
Amit Segal
Because Trump is extremely unpopular. So his endorsement is not going to let all those Trumpers in Israel who almost vanished to support Eisenkot. Okay. On the other hand, it's going to look like yet another failure for Netanyahu who failed to keep this strategic relationship with the US President. On the other hand, let's imagine what happens if Trump endorses Netanyahu and comes on a visit. Then I would say it's going to help Netanyahu in points, basically because it helps him shape the agenda of the election more than the support itself. Because a visit of a US President one week prior to the election sets the agenda. The news cycle is full with diplomacy, security, handshakes, et cetera, which is the way Netanyahu wants to frame the election. But I would say it's less dramatic than I thought. And you know, we have one example. When President Trump endorsed Orban and supported him and sent JD Vance for a political rallies of the urban party, it didn't help the unpopular Hungarian prime minister. It didn't help him.
- [34:21]
Dan Sonor
I mean, Amit, if the rap against Eisencot is that he is inexperienced in geopolitics, he's certainly inexperienced in dealing with Washington, the statecraft necessary to at that level. I'm not saying it's a fair criticism, but I'm just saying this is like the rap against him. It's just that he doesn't, you know, he doesn't have the experience to deal with Washington. It's one of the most important jobs that Any Israeli prime minister has, is dealing with Washington and that it looks like that Trump is coming in in some way to help Eisencott. Does that create an opening for Netanyahu to say Eisenhower will never be able to kind of go toe to toe with Washington, he will just get rolled by Washington?
- [34:58]
Amit Segal
No, I think it's going. I'm not sure publicly confronting Trump is going to help Netanyahu to get reelected. So, yes, if you are in the isancut headquarters and you just. President Trump has just called offering his support, and you are now in this strategic meeting whether to take the endorsement or not. Yes, take it, take it. Because it's just penetrating into Netanyahu's political base. Is it that crucial? I'm not sure, but it's funny that we mention Eisencot because I think Bennett invested so much effort over the last two years getting the support of President Trump.
- [35:35]
Dan Sonor
How so? How did he do that?
- [35:36]
Amit Segal
He knows that Jared Kushner, Whitkoff, Arnault are not members in Netanyahu's fan club, which is mutual for Bennett as well. So there were many efforts through visits to Washington, investing in the Republican Party. For Bennett, for instance, it was extremely crucial because Bennett is more hawkish than Eisenhower, of course. But since Trump loves winners and Bennett, to say the least, doesn't look like one, I think it's off the table now.
- [36:06]
Dan Sonor
Okay, final question for you, Amit. According to Channel 12 poll, Channel 12, where you work, I'm just quoting here, 84% of Israelis believe Israel did not win this war. 43% actually believe Israel, if you dig deeper into the data, lost the war. Assertively believe that Israel lost the war. This, obviously, for all the reasons we've been discussing, does not bode well for Netanyahu. You've said previously on this podcast, and obviously it's a big part of your very excellent book. And I quote here, all political careers in Israel end in failure, in tragedy. Sometimes in tragedy. That's it. All political careers end in tragedy. No one has a respectable ride off into the sunset.
- [36:46]
Deborah Pardes
You know what?
- [36:46]
Amit Segal
Yeah, I'll give an example. Last week there was the inauguration of the Obama Presidential Library.
- [36:51]
Dan Sonor
Presidential Center.
- [36:53]
Amit Segal
Libraries for boomers.
- [36:54]
Dan Sonor
Yeah.
- [36:55]
Amit Segal
So you could spot four former presidents talking amiably, you know, friendly. Yeah, look, the only equivalent picture in Israel is in, you know, wing number 10 in the Masiao Prison. When the president, the former president, the former prime minister met. No one in Israel, ends up on his feet, healthy, happy and go golfing. It never happens in Israel. And you ask when is it going to happen to Netanyahu?
- [37:24]
Daniel Hartman
I guess.
- [37:25]
Dan Sonor
Right. So that's my, that's my question is that, here's my question. Would Netanyahu consider avoiding that scenario? If you think that the clouds are forming right now and look, you never can count out Netanyahu. I never do. The guy is, how many lives, political lives, does he have? So you don't count them out. And we're a long way from the end of August here. We are sitting here at the end of June. But do you think, and we've talked about this before, but I'm just curious what your current thinking is. Do you think Netanyahu would ever consider avoiding that predicament? To quote Seinfeld, to choose not to run?
- [37:57]
Amit Segal
My obvious answer would be no. I would give it now 5%, which is way higher than I used to give to it. I mean, I would give it less than 1%, like in polymarket, less than 1%. So now it's something like 5%. Why? Because clouds are forming. Why? Because there is a chance to actually get a bargain deal or a pardon because the war hasn't ended yet. Why not? Because there isn't a single hint in Netanyahu's very long career, a career that stretches for two consecutive millennia and centuries for the world. Resignation. I personally don't think that he can resign without having the opportunity to defeat Iran once and for all. So I would say that had Israel defeated Iran, there might be a better chance for Netanyahu to resign. But because things developed or unwrapped the way that we know now, I think he's going to definitely run for a seventh term.
- [38:53]
Dan Sonor
Really?
- [38:54]
Daniel Hartman
Yes.
- [38:54]
Dan Sonor
Okay, there we go. We should let polymarket know that your numbers have moved slightly, but not substantially.
- [39:00]
Amit Segal
Absolutely.
- [39:01]
Dan Sonor
Demete Sego Poly Market Peg. All right, Amit, thank you for this.
- [39:06]
Amit Segal
Thank you so much.
- [39:06]
Dan Sonor
And I look forward to being in touch soon.
- [39:08]
Amit Segal
Take care.
- [39:25]
Dan Sonor
Hi, it's Dan Sonor. Israel is heading into one of its most consequential elections, and this time, the whole world is watching closely. Hot takes and daily noise are pretty much guaranteed to populate your media diet. But as with any election, there's a deeper story about identity, religion, democracy, and what kind of country Israelis want to live in. That's why ARC Media launched Israel Votes, a special initiative across. Call Me Back For Heaven's Sake. And Ark News Daily. You'll hear from the leading candidates shaping the race along with analysis and reporting from two of Israel's leading political analysts, ARC Media contributors Nadavael and Amit Segal. Join us for Israel Votes, your front row seat to the election that could define Israel's Future. Go to arkmedia.org votes to watch and listen. See you there.