Biden administration officials secretly discussed plans to unseat Netanyahu after ceasefire discussions stalled, but the president ultimately rejected the strategy.

At a Glance

• The Biden-Netanyahu relationship has been characterized by deep mistrust and personal friction, complicating U.S.-Israel diplomacy
• Some Biden administration officials proposed triggering Israeli elections to remove Netanyahu when ceasefire talks failed
• President Biden personally blocked the plan to undermine Netanyahu’s government
• Disagreements over Gaza war strategy, humanitarian aid, and Israel’s judicial reforms have intensified tensions
• Both leaders have been accused of interfering in each other’s domestic politics

A Strained Alliance Under Pressure

The relationship between President Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has deteriorated into one of the most contentious U.S.-Israel alliances in recent memory. Despite Biden’s October 18, 2023, solidarity visit to Tel Aviv following the Hamas attacks, fundamental disagreements over war strategy, Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, and the path to peace have created significant diplomatic rifts. These tensions reached a breaking point when the United States chose not to veto a UN Security Council resolution calling for a Gaza ceasefire, a move Netanyahu viewed as betrayal.

Former U.S. Ambassador Tom Nides candidly described the relationship: “Biden didn’t really trust Netanyahu. Netanyahu, I mean, come on everybody, he’s a survivor, a manipulator, you know, a magician when it comes to relationships. Biden saw all of that.”

Israeli judicial reform became another flashpoint, with Nides noting: “There were lots of anxieties over the issues around judicial reform, which I thought was insane.” These pre-war tensions created a foundation of mistrust that complicated cooperation after the October 7 attacks, when coordinated response was most critical.

The Plot to Unseat Netanyahu

In an extraordinary development reported on Israeli television and confirmed by multiple sources, Biden administration officials discussed a plan to force Netanyahu from office when ceasefire negotiations stalled. The strategy would either pressure Netanyahu into accepting terms for a Gaza ceasefire or trigger Israeli elections that might remove him from power. Presidential advisor Ilan Goldenberg was among those supporting the plan, which would have represented unprecedented American interference in Israeli domestic politics.

https://t.co/Dd5PhqmwgO

— #NorthGazaHolocaust (@NYplaid) April 25, 2025

President Biden ultimately rejected the scheme, preventing what would have been a dramatic escalation in U.S.-Israel tensions. This episode highlights the frustration within the administration regarding Netanyahu’s approach to ceasefire negotiations and post-war planning. Critics of the prime minister argue he has deliberately sabotaged peace efforts by introducing new conditions whenever agreements seem close.

Contradictory Narratives on Ceasefire Efforts

Competing accounts have emerged regarding who bears responsibility for stalled ceasefire talks. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has consistently pointed to Hamas as the primary obstacle, but this narrative has been challenged by multiple sources. A recently retired U.S. ambassador contradicted this position, stating, “There are currently three ceasefire deals on the table and Hamas isn’t responding to any of them.”

A former senior Israeli security official called the administration’s positioning a “shameful attempt to rewrite history and blame Hamas rather than Netanyahu for the obstruction of ceasefire talks.”

By March 2024, mounting U.S. domestic pressure and Israel’s military limitations forced Biden to shift his stance on ceasefire possibilities. This evolution marked a significant change from his earlier position when he stated “a cease-fire is not peace… every cease-fire is time [Hamas members] exploit to rebuild their stockpile of rockets, reposition fighters and restart the killing.”

Historical Context and Regional Implications

The current tensions are not without precedent. Previous U.S.-Israeli crises include the 1957 Sinai withdrawal dispute, 1962-63 nuclear tensions, and diplomatic friction during the 1973 October War. Each crisis eventually gave way to renewed cooperation, suggesting the relationship’s resilience despite periodic strain. What distinguishes the current situation is the degree to which both leaders appear willing to interfere in each other’s domestic politics.

Dan Shapiro, a former Obama administration official, noted that some Arab leaders initially supported Israel’s campaign against Hamas, saying, “They said very clearly, please tell the Israelis they have our support to wipe out Hamas.” This regional positioning highlights the complex diplomatic landscape Biden and Netanyahu must navigate while managing their bilateral tensions.

The ongoing friction has complicated broader U.S. regional objectives, particularly the potential normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. This diplomatic prize, which seemed within reach before October 7, now appears increasingly distant as Washington and Jerusalem struggle to align their Gaza strategies and postwar visions.