Israel fought the Six Day War back in June 1967. Then came the 12-Day War with Iran during June 2025. Now in 2026 there is the 12-hour war, again involving Iran and again in June.

To better understand the recent events, Israel's experience, and the implications ahead, other cases can offer helpful context.

During a Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security online session this week, former National Security Council head Yaakov Amidror and Eran Lerman, a former senior NSC official, drew on two unexpected parallels: North Korea and Google.

No free lunch for Israel

Start with Google.

The recent developments showed everyone in Israel that nothing comes without strings attached. US President Donald Trump's backing for Israel, including the various measures he has taken over time to support the country, carries a price. That price means he influences what Israel can and cannot pursue.

Israel has never enjoyed stronger support from a US president. That is the advantage. The drawback is that Israel has never been so reliant on one US president.

This is where the Google example fits.

Amidror noted two friends with startups that received Google investment. Both initially embraced the collaboration.

Yet after a year both saw that having Google as a partner meant Google would weigh in on company decisions. Amidror said one friend disliked this and ended the partnership to proceed independently.

The other stayed with Google and learned to manage its involvement.

If anyone believes they can ignore Google when it is a partner, that is a serious error, Amidror said.

A strategic choice is required. Continue with Google and accept some limits on flexibility, or go it alone without Google.

When Amidror asked other friends the same question, they all responded similarly.

They said they would remain with Google. This mirrors Israel's current position. Israel is with Google and must factor that partnership into its decisions.

The US, using the same comparison, serves as Israel's Google. Consequently it will influence how the startup is managed.

Sometimes this hurts. Sometimes it frustrates. Sometimes it restricts fully independent choices.

Yet it also brings major advantages that should not be ignored amid irritation over the larger partner's involvement.

Keeping the bigger picture in mind

It is also vital to focus on the larger context. What is that context? Iran's nuclear abilities.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu frequently highlights that he has warned about Iran's nuclear program for over 30 years. He has done so, making it his central concern.

When history is assessed a century from now, one key part of Netanyahu's record will be his work to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

This stays his main goal. Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Hamas are all secondary. The essential aim is blocking Iran from obtaining the bomb.

Then Trump arrives and states he is close to persuading the Iranians to yield on the nuclear question through talks. The military and economic pressure is working, and they will soon concede in negotiations.

Should one trust him, a president who has claimed peace where none exists, victory where none occurred, and the elimination of Iran's military strength when it still holds capabilities? Perhaps not.

Still, remember he is Google, and Google has influence.

Why Netanyahu bends to Trump's demands

This explains why Netanyahu yielded this week to Trump's preferences and avoided the kind of strike Israel had reportedly prepared against Iran on Monday after the Iranian regime launched 11 ballistic missiles at Israel. Trump called for an end to the shooting, and both Israel and Iran halted.

Why?

To allow the negotiations an opportunity.

Trump, true to form, framed this around his own authority, at least regarding Netanyahu.

Netanyahu, he has implied repeatedly in recent weeks across different settings, will follow his lead.

He is fine and will do whatever I ask, Trump told reporters on May 20. He is a very good man.

On Sunday he told the Financial Times that he calls all the shots and Netanyahu does not.

And on Tuesday he told the BBC that if he tells him to do something, he does it.

These remarks will surely be used by Netanyahu's rivals in the coming election to portray the prime minister as Trump's obedient follower.

The common view until lately was that Netanyahu was Trump's favored candidate. If so, does Trump see that such comments could harm him politically?

Maybe. But Trump also faces his own domestic political pressures.

According to Lerman, Trump has faced criticism from the Tucker Carlson wing of the MAGA movement claiming Netanyahu pulled him into the Iran conflict.

Statements such as if I tell him to do something, he does it should be viewed as responses to the accusation, now heard in some US circles, that the Iran episode shows the tail wagging the dog.

While Lerman said Trump has acted firmly against anti-Israel and antisemitic voices in the MAGA sphere, he noted the president is still influenced by that sentiment and has adjusted accordingly.

This leads to North Korea.

One of the clearest cases of failed diplomacy in recent times is North Korea's success in becoming a nuclear power, Amidror said.

One factor that kept the US from using force against North Korea was South Korea's strong resistance.

And why did South Korea oppose action?

Because of concern that a US strike would prompt North Korea to unleash heavy retaliation on Seoul, located just 60 km from the Demilitarized Zone.

The North Koreans maintain thousands of artillery pieces and rocket launchers hidden in the border mountains that South Koreans feared could deliver a massive barrage on the capital. So they pressed the US not to attack.

Iranians learned 'hostage strategy' from North Korea

The Iranians have taken more from the North Koreans than missile technology. They have also adopted the value of this hostage approach.

Iran is effectively holding the Gulf states hostage much as North Korea held Seoul hostage, not only discouraging major American moves but also helping convince Washington to curb Israel's strikes.

The Iranians are gradually creating the same situation in the Gulf, Amidror said. They are stating clearly that action against Iran will lead to destruction of the Gulf countries.

Behind the scenes these countries are telling the Americans that if action is taken it must be complete, finishing the regime and destroying its capabilities entirely. But if the job is left half done, do not place the Gulf countries in a terrible position, because going only partway will leave them to pay the price.

The Iranians have built a coercive position in the Gulf because the Americans are unwilling to go further and fully eliminate Iran's capabilities, Amidror said.

Lerman, seeking to interpret Trump's often mixed messages, one day discussing the destruction of Iranian society and the next considering talks with a new Iranian leader, offered a variation on the ancient Chinese strategist Sun Tzu's saying know thyself and know thy enemy and you will not lose a hundred battles.

The Trump version, he said, is if you do not know what you are doing, the enemy does not either.

That said, Lerman added that Trump has shown resolve to keep Iran from becoming a nuclear state. And that consistency may also trace back to North Korea.

The experience of attempting to persuade Kim Jong Un to abandon his nuclear project in Trump's first term, and failing, has shown him that such regimes must be stopped before they obtain the bomb, he said.

And on this point I think he has been very consistent. Either they deliver something clearly better than the deal former president Barack Obama reached, or we may return to the starting point.

Meaning a full-scale war.

Whether Trump is correct about the negotiations remains uncertain. What this week showed, however, is something different: Israel's strategic reliance on the US has grown so strong that when the president says stop, Israel stops.

That may be frustrating. It may even feel uncomfortable and humbling.

But as Amidror's startup example showed, that is the cost of having Google as a partner.