Israel is unhappy with the direction U.S.-Iran talks appear to be taking but continues to be in direct communication with the Trump administration, an Israeli official told Jewish Insider on Monday after a second round of talks between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic concluded over the weekend.

“It sure does look like the JCPOA,” the official said, comparing the details that have been made public from the negotiations to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. “Are we happy with it? I don’t think that’s come across in any of the statements the prime minister has made.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continued to talk tough in Iran, saying in a recorded statement on Saturday night, “I am committed to preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons. I will not give in on this; neither will I slacken or retreat on this, not even a millimeter.”

Still, the official told JI, “at least there is a sense that we are very much a participant in this exercise, in the sense that we are in continuous contact with the U.S.”

“The main thing when you think about our communications with the [Trump] administration and what distinguishes them from the situation with [former President Barack] Obama is that Obama did the talks behind our back. We found out about them from the Mossad, not from the Americans. Here [with the Trump administration] the conversation is intense, multifaceted and continuous.”

Part of the ongoing communications with Washington is dealing with the “cacophony of voices” and being in contact with both the hawkish and isolationist camps in the Trump administration “to make sure Israel’s interests are being secured,” the official said.

Netanyahu confidante and Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer was in Rome, where U.S.-Iran nuclear talks took place, over the weekend, two sources confirmed to JI. Dermer conveyed Jerusalem’s concerns and red lines to the American side. Trump administration Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, who was in Rome leading the American talks with Iran, is also responsible for mediating Israel-Hamas talks to reach a ceasefire and free the hostages from Gaza, and Dermer is also the head of Israel’s hostage negotiations team.

In his statement on Saturday, Netanyahu also noted that he led “many actions … over the years in order to strike the Iranian program and delay it,” echoing a statement he made earlier last week, in response to a report that the Trump administration told Israel not to proceed with a plan to strike Iran as long as negotiations are ongoing. 

Israel is still working on a narrower attack on Iranian nuclear sites that would not require American participation, according to Reuters. The strike would be smaller in scale than the plans presented to Washington. While the large-scale plans had a late spring to summer timeline, it remains unclear when Israel might execute a smaller strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

President Donald Trump said last week that he is “not in a rush” to back a military strike on Iran.

“I think that Iran has a chance to have a great country and to live happily without death,” Trump said. “That’s my first option. If there’s a second option, I think it would be very bad for Iran, and I think Iran is wanting to talk.”

In an interview with The Telegraph published on Saturday, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar denied that Israel had authorized attack plans against Iran that Trump subsequently rejected.

“I am a member of the security cabinet, and all the intimate forums, and I don’t remember such a decision,”Sa’ar said. “I don’t think that such a decision was taken. But Israel is committed to the objective of preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons. If that objective can be achieved by a diplomatic path, it is accepted.”

Sa’ar said he “believe[s] the [Trump] administration is committed to dealing with this issue. It has put it very high on its agenda. The most important thing is the objective. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

Asked if Witkoff is pursuing “a soft, Obama-style deal,” Sa’ar pointed to a post on X from the envoy in which he said that he seeks an agreement that would have Iran stop enriching uranium. 

Sa’ar warned that agreements with Iran are not worth much: “Iran always mocked its international obligations. I’m not excluding the option that they will try to get some partial agreements, to avoid getting to the necessary solution.”

“We are speaking directly with the Americans. We’re also speaking with European friends,” he said. “I think we all have the same objective. Iran is in a position of relative weakness, and this should be used to achieve the objective, and not to let Iran escape for the sake of convenience, to waste time until the circumstances change.”

Iran International, a U.K.-based anti-regime media outlet, outlined Iran’s proposed deal, which would allow it to continue enriching uranium to 3.67%, the level widely accepted as being for civilian purposes, but not dismantle any centrifuges or other nuclear infrastructure, which the Institute for the Study of War said “would likely preserve Iran’s ability to rapidly rebuild its nuclear program.” The Iranian proposal would also only have highly-enriched uranium moved to a third country at a late stage in the deal. Iran was thought to have enough such uranium for six nuclear weapons as of February. 

The American response has not yet been made public, other than that an administration official said they made “good progress.” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the sides plan to begin technical negotiations on Wednesday.