Major Garrett sat down with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss the campaign against Iran, the broader regional fights with Hezbollah and Hamas, and the political, military and information challenges Israel now faces. Below is a condensed, rewritten account of their conversation.
On the status of the war with Iran, Netanyahu said the campaign has achieved a great deal but is not finished. He emphasized that nuclear material and enrichment sites remain to be removed or dismantled, ballistic missile production must be halted, and Iran’s proxy networks must be addressed. Economic pressure and blockades—pursued by the United States under President Trump—could resolve some issues without further military action, he said, but both countries are prepared to use force if necessary. He declined to discuss operational details.
Asked how highly enriched uranium might be removed, Netanyahu said plainly that physically taking it out of Iran would be feasible if there were an agreement, and suggested President Trump was prepared to “go in” if required. He reiterated his unwillingness to provide specifics about military plans but argued that stopping Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is essential because of Tehran’s stated hostility toward Israel and the U.S. He described previous Israeli operations as having set back Iran’s program and said that without those actions Iran “would have had a bomb” within months.
Netanyahu described Iran today as weakened compared with earlier decades, with fissures inside the regime and economic pressure that has created debate among hard-liners and more pragmatic elements. Still, he warned, the regime remains dangerous and fanatical, and its intentions—written into its constitution and rhetoric—are deeply hostile to Israel and America. He said he believes the regime is weaker than at any time since 1979 but cautioned that collapse is possible though not guaranteed.
On Hezbollah and Lebanon, Netanyahu described the group as a proxy of Iran that before the fighting had amassed roughly 150,000 rockets and missiles aimed at Israeli cities. He said Israel has destroyed the bulk—more than 90 percent—of that arsenal but that thousands of projectiles remain. Israel has created a security zone that blunted planned invasions, he added, but Hezbollah continues to hold Lebanon hostage and must be removed as a powerful independent military presence. He rejected the idea of accepting a ceasefire that leaves Hezbollah intact, saying Israel will not allow its communities to remain under constant rocket threat.
Netanyahu argued that weakening or toppling the Iranian regime would undermine the entire proxy network—Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis—and might end those threats, but he stressed this is not certain and could take time. He said Israeli intelligence has unusually granular capabilities inside Iran and has used surgical operations against nuclear scientists and facilities, but that targeted attacks alone are not sufficient to guarantee regime change: the Iranian security apparatus is large and willing to violently suppress dissent.
Regarding public reporting of a White House meeting where regime change was discussed, Netanyahu disputed any portrayal that suggested certainty about overthrowing Tehran. He said U.S. and Israeli leaders recognized both risks and uncertainty, agreeing that action carried danger but inaction was even more dangerous if Iran achieved nuclear weapons or buried its capabilities underground.
Netanyahu described a successful shift in power balance: Israel, he said, has emerged as the most powerful country in the Middle East. He credited close U.S.-Israel cooperation, recent operations that degraded Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, and the Abraham Accords for deepening ties with some Arab states. He argued that Israel’s technological and military strengths have made it a valued partner across the region.
On information warfare and public opinion, Netanyahu acknowledged a significant problem on social media that has eroded sympathy for Israel, especially among younger audiences in the United States. He blamed coordinated foreign disinformation campaigns, bot farms and manipulative content as well as organic criticism of Israeli actions. He acknowledged mistakes and civilian casualties in war but insisted Israel takes extraordinary steps to minimize noncombatant harm—texting, leafleting, targeted warnings—and said adversaries deliberately embed among civilians to generate images and narratives damaging to Israel.
Netanyahu proposed a more proactive democratic response to the information war: not censorship, he said, but sustained efforts to counter lies, expose inauthentic accounts and engage hearts and minds of young people. He accepted that Israel has not done well enough so far and said it must improve.
On U.S. military aid, Netanyahu said he believes Israel should begin drawing down American financial support over the next decade and move from aid to partnership. He suggested joint projects, cost-sharing on defense research and intelligence cooperation as an alternative to the current aid model. He framed this as Israel’s coming of age and stressed gratitude for past U.S. support.
Asked about other global players, Netanyahu acknowledged China and Russia have had interactions with Iran—China supplying some missile components, Russia a mixed role—but said neither has provided overwhelming direct military support that shifts the balance. He urged major powers to weigh their interests in keeping global waterways open and stable.
On Gaza, Netanyahu said disarmament and demilitarization of Hamas have not been achieved. Israel has substantially reduced weapons production capacity and curtailed smuggling routes into Gaza, but Hamas reneged on promises to disarm. Netanyahu said someone must enforce disarmament—international partners or Israel itself—and emphasized Israel will not allow a return of the threat Hamas posed on October 7.
Regarding responsibility for Israel’s failures on October 7, Netanyahu accepted political and institutional responsibility runs from the prime minister downward and said he supports an independent, bipartisan commission—modeled on the U.S. 9/11 commission—to examine the facts. He defended subsequent Israeli operations as necessary to remove the “noose of death” Iran had created around Israel and highlighted the operational successes that, in his view, prevented Iran from fielding a near-term nuclear arsenal.
On domestic and international social strains, Netanyahu addressed the recent rise in antisemitism and contested narratives about Israel’s treatment of Christians. He called claims of state policy against Christians “fabrications,” pointed to Christian soldiers serving in Israel’s armed forces and stressed Israel’s protection of holy sites. At the same time he warned that slander and vilification spread on social media contribute to cyclical prejudice and that democracies must fight both the physical and informational battles of this era.
Netanyahu closed by framing Israel’s campaign as part of a broader fight for free societies: strength, resolve and sometimes the force of arms are necessary to defeat regimes and groups committed to violence. He said Israel must keep pressing, improve its information strategy, deepen partnerships and pursue a long-term effort against threats while remaining open to negotiated outcomes where they achieve security goals.
Major Garrett and Netanyahu concluded with mutual thanks. The interview covered tactical, strategic and political dimensions of Israel’s fights with Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, as well as the diplomatic, technological and media challenges that will shape the region going forward.