Trump’s visit to the Middle East represents a historic choice for Israel
The U.S.-Israel special relationship is in danger unless Israel changes course.
President Donald Trump’s visit to the Middle East is noteworthy not only for the countries he is visiting in the Gulf but also because he is skipping Israel—long America’s closest ally in the region. The visit and policy actions Trump has taken over the past month indicate that his version of transactionalism and isolationism is coming for the Middle East and that Israel’s role in that vision might be marginal or contradictory. Given Democrats’ frustration with Israeli policies on the Palestinian issue, bipartisan support for the U.S.-Israel special relationship could soon be a policy of the past. It does not have to be that way—if Israel is willing to change course, end the war in Gaza, and pursue a vision of integration with its Arab neighbors that includes Palestinian rights to security, freedom, and self-determination.
Democrats Aligned on Regional Security but not on the Palestinians
Since the 1993 signing of the Oslo Accords, the United States and Israel were largely aligned on two of the central issues in the relationship. They agreed on moving toward Palestinian self-governance and eventually a Palestinian state, even if they often disagreed about details. Though there might have been tactical disagreements, the two sides agreed that their interests in the Middle East largely overlapped and that both countries were better off working closely on common security concerns in the region. This alignment between the two liberal democracies, combined with deep cultural, religious, and economic ties, undergirded an overwhelming bipartisan consensus in support of the Jewish State.
This consensus began to fracture first on the left, but now also on the right, beginning in 2009 with the election of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. For American liberals, the key disagreement has been about Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, which has become increasingly out of step with their values. During the Obama administration, Israel increasingly moved away from supporting a Palestinian state, instead expanding West Bank settlements and deepening the occupation of Palestinian territory, culminating in a U.S. abstention of Security Council Resolution 2234, harshly criticizing Israeli settlement activity.
Under Joe Biden, Democrats were horrified by the atrocities committed by Hamas during the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks and supported an Israeli military response to ensure such an attack could never happen again. However, sharp disagreements arose between President Joe Biden and Netanyahu over Israel’s treatment of Palestinian civilians, including not allowing enough aid into Gaza and concerns about the level of civilian casualties. These concerns led to protests on college campuses last year and a massive drop in Israel’s favorability ratings among Democrats, from 65% in 2021 to only 33% today.
Despite these sharp disagreements, Democratic presidents remained mostly aligned with Israel on regional security. Barack Obama and Netanyahu famously disagreed over the Iran nuclear deal, but Obama supported a historic $38 billion 10-year memorandum of understanding on arms to Israel and underwrote the Iron Dome missile defense system with billions more. Under Joe Biden, that cooperation was even more vital with the United States streaming two aircraft carriers into the Middle East in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attacks and making clear the United States would come to Israel’s defense to deter future attacks. Biden pushed through an emergency $14 billion for Israel’s defense, and his administration worked hand in glove with Israel to defend Israeli territory when Iran launched hundreds of ballistic missiles and drones at Israel in April and October 2024. He also supported Israeli operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon and against Iranian air defenses in response.
Trump Aligned on the Palestinians but not Regional Security
Early in Trump’s second term, it appeared he would largely return to the formula of his first term and provide Israel with near-unconditional support. He endorsed a plan for Gaza that involved the displacement of most of the Palestinian population, supported a total aid blockade on the Gaza Strip, and has appointed Mike Huckabee, an ardent supporter of the settler project and Israeli annexation of the West Bank, as ambassador.
However, Trump’s visit to the Middle East and the dizzying display of U.S. policy breaks with Netanyahu on regional security issues represents a potentially massive shift. During his first term, Trump’s transactional and isolationist instincts were muted in the Middle East, where he largely followed the more interventionist, Israel-aligned tendencies of religious conservatives and Republican hawks. With his decision to skip Israel, make the primary focus of the trip business deals with Gulf states, and his policy decisions on Iran, Yemen, Syria, and Gaza, it appears that this time around the MAGA vision of U.S. foreign policy is coming for the Middle East.
Trump invited Netanyahu to the White House and announced to the world he would be pursuing negotiations with Iran instead of the military course of action supported by Netanyahu. In Yemen, Trump cut his own deal with the Houthis to end attacks on international shipping in the Red Sea in exchange for ending the U.S. bombing campaign, but the deal did not include any conditions on the Houthis ceasing continued missile strikes on Israel. Trump bypassed Israel, negotiating directly with Hamas on the release of the last living American hostage in Gaza, Edan Alexander. And just this week, Trump announced he would lift sanctions on Syria and met its new leader despite Israeli concerns about the Syrian leadership’s historical ties to extremist organizations and outsized Turkish influence. Meanwhile, it is also becoming clear that though the Trump administration would welcome facilitating a normalization agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, the United States is increasingly focused on bilateral U.S.-Saudi agreements, including a $142 billion arms deal Trump announced in Riyadh this week.
A Historic Moment of Decision for Israel
Left unchecked, the Democratic misalignment with Israel on the Palestinian issue combined with Republican misalignment on regional security will transform the special relationship between the United States and Israel into an increasingly ordinary one. Democrats will not indefinitely support Israel’s security as its treatment of Palestinians cuts against their values—19 senators recently signaled a willingness to put some limited restrictions on U.S. military support for Israel. Republicans will not give the Netanyahu government a blank check to do as it will with the Palestinians if they hear from Saudi, Emirati, and Qatari leadership that the situation in Gaza is terrible for business. A new bipartisan consensus will form on Israel that is simply less central and less aligned with U.S. policy.
Israel faces a choice. It can continue down its increasingly senseless war in Gaza and be left behind as U.S. policy focuses on an integrated and economically rising Middle East. Some on the Israeli right embrace this view and are calling for more Israeli independence from the United States.
Alternately, it can reset its relationship with the United States, put it on a better footing with both political parties, and sustain the historic special relationship. This strategy would start with a decision to agree to end the war in Gaza in exchange for the release of the remaining 58 Israeli hostages—a position supported by 70% of the Israeli public but not the Netanyahu government. Israel could then work with the Arab states on a post-conflict plan for Gaza, including plans on security, governance, and reconstruction that would ensure Hamas no longer governs Gaza and would, in the long run, seek to marginalize and disarm the organization while putting in place a viable Palestinian alternative. And it could use the end of the war to move toward a comprehensive regional security arrangement that would include normalization and integration between Israel and all its Arab neighbors, notably Saudi Arabia, and the creation of a Palestinian state.
Such an approach would not only be good for Israel’s regional positioning, but it also would rescue the special status of the U.S.-Israel relationship. Democrats would again see a country whose behavior toward the Palestinians is consistent with their values. Republicans would see a partner in the growing economic integration in the Middle East. And Trump would even see the potential for that coveted Nobel Peace Prize.
Ilan Goldenberg is senior vice president and chief policy officer at J Street. He served as Vice President Kamala Harris's special adviser on the Middle East and previously held positions at the Pentagon and the State Department.
 | A guest post by
|
OMG! NO! NOT A Potential Nobel Prize for Trump!!!!!!!
If quite secondarily to Trump's personal financial arrangements with Arab countries, a peace plan for Israel/Palestine were to emerge during this administration it would not by any means offset the cruelty of the dissolution of USAID and his cruelty to his own citizens and migrants transported to concentration camps.
Nobel Prize? Not even a thought should be given to that!
One of the reasons trump won the election was likely the Jewish vote which saw him as an ally of Israel. I think his subsequent behavior seems to indicate that he courted the vote so he could get elected and then do whatever he wants, which is to enrich himself and American business. A lot of voters are beginning to realize that many of this administration's policies are NOT what they voted for. I suspect this is a rude awakening for the Jewish vote.