On Sunday night, Israelis went to bed expecting to be woken by sirens. The Israeli Air Force had bombed a Hezbollah base in Beirut, and Iranian leaders lined up to promise immediate, dramatic, punishing revenge before dawn.
Instead of a barrage of Iranian missiles, the country woke up to what may be worse news: the Trump administration and the Iranian regime had agreed on a deal.
Yesterday morning, the Iranian news channel Mehr shared what it claimed was in the “Memorandum of Understanding” and it seemed to be more or less correct: the US agrees that Iran gets control of the Strait of Hormuz, in return for Iran agreeing to let ships pass. Iran gets broad sanctions relief, an end to the US naval siege, all their frozen assets back and up to $300 billion in “reconstruction” money. Iran gets almost everything it wants.
Israel says it’s not a party to any US-Iran business and needs to defend its northern border
The US gets basically nothing. There was nothing in the deal on missiles, nothing on the nuclear program. When it comes to Iran’s regional proxies, the US gets less than nothing: the deal explicitly protects Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Nobody in Israel is celebrating this agreement. From left to right, words like “betrayal” and “surrender” are being used. Benjamin Netanyahu, unable to defend the deal but unwilling to publicly criticize it, addressed the nation to implausibly claim that he and Trump had stopped some supposedly-imminent Iranian nuclear attack. His implication was that even a bad deal is better than the alternative.
If Israelis are disappointed by Trump, the feeling seems to be mutual. After Israel bombed that building in Beirut on Sunday, President Trump was furious, telling reporter Barak Ravid: “Why did Bibi have to do a fucking attack? I was so pissed off. I let him know. He has no fucking judgement. I let him know that.”
That was just the most recent in a series of Trump’s public expressions of frustration at Netanyahu over Lebanon. When the US and Israel began their attacks on Iran in February, Hezbollah, under Iranian pressure, started firing rockets and drones into northern Israel. Israel responded by invading southern Lebanon and pounding Hezbollah targets across the rest of the country.
Iran is negotiating only with the US but it still insists that any agreements it makes with Trump also bind Israel. Israel says it’s not a party to any US-Iran business and needs to defend its northern border. With the IDF still occupying southern Lebanon, and Hezbollah still launching drones into northern Israel, how long before another incident like Sunday’s?
At the height of the Iran war in early April, I heard an interview on Israeli radio with a supporter of the attacks. He proudly told listeners that the bombings would set Iran’s weapons and nuclear programs back at least two years. The presenters were taken aback. Only two years? What happens in three years, then, when there may be a Democrat in the White House who wouldn’t join Israel in a new round of bombings in 2029? “Don’t worry,” said the pro-war guest. Marco Rubio will be president and he’s on our side.
Some people claim that American policy supports Israel because of the influence of AIPAC, or the evangelical Christian lobby. Some point to shared strategic interests. But the most important reason why American presidents have been pro-Israel is because the American public is pro-Israel.
Or at least, it was. Over the past few years, Israel’s popularity in the US has nosedived. This drop is particularly pronounced among younger people; according to Pew’s polling, in 2022, Israel’s net popularity among men under 50 was -2.by April this year it had collapsed to -47. Four fifths of Democratic voters have an unfavorable opinion of Israel, but so do 41 percent of Republicans, and those numbers are rising.
The shift is already evident in the Democratic party, where there’s a (probably false) perception that Joe Biden’s support for Israel cost Kamala Harris the presidency. Candidates boast that they haven’t accepted money from AIPAC and several progressive insurgents have ousted traditionally pro-Israel Democrats in their primaries.
Among Democratic candidates for the presidency in 2028, California governor Gavin Newsom called Israel an “Apartheid” state in March before somewhat walking it back. Polls suggest that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who claimed Israel committed genocide in Gaza, could also be a strong contender for the Democratic nomination.
On the Republican side, Vice President J.D. Vance is the most likely nominee for 2028, but he’s widely seen as ambivalent towards Israel. Vance defended Tucker Carlson when he interviewed a Holocaust revisionist, and the Vice President often interacts on X with openly anti-Semitic white nationalists.
Israeli leaders seem only faintly aware of the issue. Realizing that both Democrats and Republicans in Congress are uncomfortable with ongoing US military aid to Israel, Netanyahu decided that it’d be a good idea to work to end it. Less aid means less leverage, the theory goes. Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders have spoken about building up the domestic arms and armaments industry so that Israel is no longer reliant on US exports, but that will take years if it happens at all.
Trump is the latest president to fall out with Benjamin Netanyahu. Joe Biden, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton all ended up at loggerheads with the man who’s been the face of Israel for so long.
Israel must have a general election by October, and Netanyahu is once again planning to lead Likud into that election, despite Trump’s comment that he might choose to retire. The polls suggest that the current governing coalition is going to lose. Perhaps Netanyahu will still be able to cobble together a government, but the opposition parties have a real chance to oust him.
So much of the hostility towards Israel has become attached, rightly or wrongly, to Netanyahu. A new leader could be a chance for a different strategic approach for Israel, but also a new relationship with America.
Currently, the American people seem to have given up on Israel. Whether it takes a new leader, a change in policy or an attempt to change hearts and minds, something has to shift. If not, Israel could find itself standing alone.
Comments