President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met at the White House on Tuesday as a temporary halt in U.S. attacks on Iran opened a narrow diplomatic window for addressing the Strait of Hormuz, Tehran’s nuclear activities and the future direction of the war. The closed-door session, the leaders’ first face-to-face meeting since the joint U.S.-Israeli campaign began, lasted nearly 90 minutes and was described by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt as positive and productive.

The meeting took place after the United States paused strikes following 13 consecutive nights of attacks on Iran. The suspension was intended to provide space for diplomacy, but Trump has made clear that military action remains an option. He said this week that the United States could return to striking Iran if negotiations fail, preserving pressure on Tehran even as regional intermediaries attempt to prevent another escalation.

The immediate diplomatic effort centers on the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman. Iran has disrupted commercial passage through the strait during the conflict, forcing shipping companies to reconsider routes, delaying energy cargoes and increasing transportation risks. Those effects have reached beyond the region by influencing crude-oil prices, tanker markets and expectations for inflation in the United States.

Iranian officials insist that the current discussions are being conducted with Oman rather than directly with the United States. Tehran has characterized the talks as an effort to create mechanisms governing maritime traffic and security. Iran’s ambassador to Russia said Iran and Oman were also considering how fees and services connected to passage through the strait might be managed, although no final arrangement had been announced.

That distinction matters because Washington and Tehran continue to describe the diplomatic process differently. Trump has spoken of substantial discussions with Iran, while Iran’s Foreign Ministry says its recent contacts have been exclusively with Oman. The difference may partly reflect indirect messaging through intermediaries, but it also shows how far the parties remain from publicly acknowledging a conventional negotiation.

The White House is attempting to use the pause to secure practical concessions without appearing to reduce military pressure. U.S. officials have said additional military assets remain available in the region, and Trump has repeatedly warned Iran against rebuilding or expanding nuclear facilities. The president has specifically threatened action against a heavily protected location known as Pickaxe Mountain, which U.S. and Israeli officials suspect may be connected to nuclear work.

Ahead of Tuesday’s meeting, Trump pushed back against reports that Netanyahu planned to brief him on Israeli intelligence concerning the mountain. Trump said he was already aware of the activity and suggested Netanyahu wanted to keep the United States deeply involved in the campaign. At the same time, Trump repeated that the site could be attacked if Iran does not reach an agreement.

The exchange illustrated a broader difference between the two governments. Israel has favored maintaining continuous pressure on Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure, arguing that Tehran could use any lengthy pause to disperse personnel, repair facilities or move sensitive equipment. Trump, while continuing to threaten force, has shown greater interest in testing whether negotiations can reduce the immediate threat to shipping and limit the economic consequences of the war.

Netanyahu entered the meeting seeking a clearer understanding of how long the United States intends to give diplomacy and what conditions would trigger renewed attacks. Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations said before the talks that several outcomes remained possible and that Israel was prepared for different scenarios. Netanyahu had also said he wanted to hear directly what Trump envisioned for the coming days and weeks.

Israel did not participate directly in the latest round of U.S.-Iran fighting, according to reports on the conflict, although Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said American aircraft had used Israeli bases during recent attacks. That operational connection underscores how closely the two militaries remain linked even when their governments differ over timing, tactics or the desired end state.

The conflict’s regional reach has complicated the diplomacy. Iran and groups aligned with Tehran have threatened or attacked U.S. interests and American partners across the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Iraq and Israel reported drone incidents this week, although responsibility for some of the launches remained uncertain. Qatar and Saudi Arabia blamed Iran-backed militias in Iraq for some incursions, while Iraqi authorities opened an investigation.

Such attacks create a persistent risk that an incident outside Iran could restart the broader confrontation. A drone that kills U.S. personnel, damages a major energy installation or strikes a population center could quickly overwhelm the current diplomatic process. Iran’s military has also warned that it will respond to threats against Iranian vessels and commercial traffic in waters it considers under its authority.

For the United States, the war has become both a military operation and a domestic political challenge. Trump formally notified Congress earlier in July that hostilities had resumed, keeping questions about presidential war powers, operational objectives and the length of the campaign before lawmakers. The administration must also contend with public concern over fuel prices, shipping disruptions and the possibility of an extended Middle Eastern conflict before the November midterm elections.

The Strait of Hormuz remains the clearest measure of whether diplomacy is producing results. Limited passage or an informal maritime arrangement could relieve pressure on global energy markets even without resolving the nuclear dispute. A breakdown, by contrast, could prompt the United States to intensify naval operations, resume airstrikes or enforce stricter controls against Iranian shipping.

Tuesday’s White House discussions extended beyond Iran. Officials said Trump and Netanyahu were also expected to address the U.S.-backed framework between Israel and Lebanon and potential expansion of the Abraham Accords. Those subjects are connected to the Iran conflict because Washington’s regional strategy depends on limiting the ability of Tehran and Hezbollah to reopen additional fronts while strengthening cooperation among Israel and Arab governments.

The Council on Foreign Relations’ conflict tracker described the ceasefire framework as vulnerable, noting that the United States and Iran had traded attacks after accusing each other of violations. That history gives negotiators little room for error. Previous pauses have reduced violence temporarily without resolving disagreements over nuclear restrictions, maritime authority, sanctions, missile programs or Iran’s relationships with armed groups across the region.

The most important unanswered question is whether the United States and Israel can agree on an endgame. Washington appears focused on preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon, securing navigation and reducing attacks on U.S. forces and partners. Israel’s objectives include those goals but may also require a longer-term degradation of Iran’s military capabilities and regional network.

For now, the fighting has slowed but the conflict has not been settled. American forces remain positioned for renewed operations, Iran retains the ability to threaten regional shipping and bases, and Israel continues to monitor suspected nuclear activity. The White House meeting showed that diplomacy has returned to the center of the crisis, but it also demonstrated how quickly the United States, Israel and Iran could move back toward open warfare if the talks through Oman fail.