All Policy Analysis by David Makovsky

Israel's concerns about the framework nuclear deal center on how the United States will prevent Iran from getting away with violations, increasing its destabilizing actions in the Middle East, and triggering a regional arms race, all while Tehran gets to retain much of its industrial-size nuclear infrastructure.

To avoid a full-blown diplomatic collision, Obama will have to urgently address concerns about the Iranian nuclear deal, while Netanyahu will need to publicly declare a two-state-minded policy on Israeli settlements.

Forces both within and beyond the prime minister's control have led to his shaky standing.

Israeli parties are placing a premium on capturing marginal votes within their blocs rather than competing across the left-right spectrum, and this status quo is working to Netanyahu's benefit.

In responding to the PA's move, Washington will need to strike a balance between firing shots across the ICC's bow and preserving invaluable Israeli-Palestinian security coordination in the West Bank.

The PA's current approach consists of relying on international support against Israel and waiting for Hamas to weaken in Gaza, but neither tactic is bearing fruit thus far.

Although the prospect of the ICC actually prosecuting Israeli officials is uncertain at best, the PA has torpedoed any chances for near-term diplomacy merely by opening that door, and perhaps invited U.S. financial countermeasures as well.

The long-serving prime minister suddenly is no longer the presumptive favorite against a rapidly consolidating opposition, which will likely spur him to shore up his own right-wing base throughout the campaign season.

As the Iran deadline approaches, violence flares up in Jerusalem, and respective election cycles ebb and flow, U.S. and Israeli officials will need to work harder than ever to manage bilateral tensions.

Proximity to the Green Line was not interpreted equally by U.S. and Israeli leaders.