David E. Sanger

The U.S.

has an interest in an Iranian government emerging from this that is at least cohesive enough to make decisions and engage in international negotiations.

The Israelis might be perfectly happy with sheer chaos

It would then lead to enough social upheaval in Iran that it would overthrow the current regime.

And better yet, as far as the Israelis are concerned, might result in such internal upheaval that Iran can't even think about Israel.

But what's really interesting to me, Michael, is that while this dance takes place about

whether and where and when negotiations would take place.

The Israelis are using every available minute to hit more targets across Iran.

On Friday, they went after a number of nuclear sites.

And the Iranians, for their part, are using every moment to go after American targets in the Gulf.

And they had one big success from their point of view, which is they took out two major American aircraft, one a in-air refueling aircraft and the other one of these command centers that cost half a billion dollars or more that are used to go defend the Gulf against incoming drones and missiles.

And they did that on the same day that they were exchanging messages about where negotiations may take place.

Well, it could be.

Or it could be a negotiating gambit in itself.

You know, Michael, this is the question the president seems to ask his aides very regularly, which is why haven't they capitulated yet?

And I think the answer is complicated.

But the first part of it is that the surviving Iranian leadership asked the question, why should we trust them in the negotiations?

Back in June of last year, they were engaged in negotiations, and it got cut short by the attack on Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, the three major nuclear sites.

That's right.

In February, they were negotiating on a broader agreement, and suddenly the Israelis and the Americans team up on what was clearly a well-planned, well-coordinated attack on the entire country.