Trump has turned the US from Israel's failed restrainer into its fervent enabler

In a recent article in the Survival journal, I unpack the ideological and grand strategic convergences between the Trump and Netanyahu administrations that will enable the latter to enact its transformative and destabilising regional vision. This is the same vision that Biden tried and failed to prevent. In keeping with an “America First” isolationist worldview, Vice President J.D. Vance has argued that “America doesn’t have to constantly police every region of the world”; instead, the US should “let the Israelis [...] provide the counterbalance to Iran.”

Biden’s Efforts vs. Trump’s Hands-off Approach: The Impact on Israeli Strategy

The problem with this approach is that after Hamas’s murderous attacks on October 7, Israel’s leaders have no appetite for a ceasefire that would precipitate a return to the pre-war status quo. Instead, Netanyahu has prolonged and expanded the war, driven by a desire to not only confront Iran and its allies but to rollback their influence and curtail their power. Netanyahu’s far-right coalition partners have capitalised on this grand strategic shift, by seizing the impetus to push for an increase in settlement building and transformative goals like annexation and ethnic cleansing, in both Gaza and the West Bank.

In short: Israel is now pursuing a revisionist grand strategy that uses military force and territorial conquest to remake the regional balance of power in its favour. This is exactly why Netanyahu has refused to end the ongoing war in Gaza or withdraw the Israeli army from its re-occupation of southern Lebanon. It also explains why Israel responded to the fall of a long-term rival – the Bashar al-Assad regime – not with diplomatic outreach to the new government in Damascus, but with an aggressive series of military strikes and a creeping occupation of Syrian territory. Israel has transitioned from tolerating perceived threats and rivals on its doorstep (and even coexisting with them) to seeking to roll back or remove them entirely.

The Dangerous Consequences of Trump’s US-Israel Policies

Biden recognised the danger this vision posed for Israel, the region and for the US’ national interests. This is why he pressured Israel to accept ceasefires, held up some arms deliveries and openly criticised the Netanyahu government’s policies. But Biden could not convince Netanyahu to end Israel’s brutal war. The Biden administration also tried and failed to stop Israel from entering Gaza’s Rafah region in May 2024. Israel repeatedly rebutted the US’ requests and incrementally impatient demands to delineate a “day after” plan for the territory, let alone commit to Palestinian sovereignty within it. The result is that the Biden administration will be remembered for enabling Netanyahu’s war, rather than ending it.

Trump, by contrast, is much more dangerous in that he is using the US’s status as a global hegemon to pave the way for Israel to do whatever it wants. When Biden was in charge, Netanyahu repeatedly censured his ministers who openly backed ethnically cleansing the Gaza Strip. Yet since Trump himself has endorsed exactly this policy – under the guise of his so-called “Gaza Riviera” plan – Netanyahu has changed his tune and has instructed Israeli ministries to make plans to “transfer” Palestinians out of the territory. US-Israel relations under Trump are therefore proving the exception to the rule that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Despite his oft-proclaimed interests in “making deals”, the US’s policies towards Israel look far less conditional and transactional under Trump than they did under Biden.

Biden’s Pressure on Netanyahu: Failure to End the War

Thus, US-Israel relations under a second Trump term will be the outlier that bucks any broader “America First” isolationist shift. Trump will try and do less than Biden. He will exert less pressure on Israel to change its behaviour. He will also devolve more regional decision-making to Israel and other local allies. But he will not end the long-term paradigm of providing unprecedented military, political and economic largesse to Israel. The result will be a worst-case scenario for advocates of US disengagement and engagement alike. Washington will continue to defend Jerusalem’s actions and provide it with arms. But it will have less inclination and ability to curtail its increasingly revisionist, expansionist and destructive regional policies.

Trump's 'Gaza Riviera' Plan: A Free Pass for Israel’s Expansion

Advocates of retrenching the US-Israel “special relationship” claim that doing so will lead to a decrease in anti-US resentment. This is a legitimate argument with significant merit. The US is, after all, paying more in terms of increasing its economic and military support for Israel, whilst getting less in return. Global revulsion at Israel’s policies and Washington’s enabling of them also undermines the US’ reputation and power worldwide. But advocates of ending or retrenching the “special relationship” must also be realistic: it will not happen under a Trump administration, no matter how isolationist it is elsewhere.