The US, Israel’s Enforcer
Saying no to Israel has been extremely difficult for every American president. Will history repeat itself in the Israel-Iran conflict?
When an international crisis occurs, media outlets characteristically report on what is happening right now: the bombing, the destruction, the death. As a result, the public often fails to comprehend to what extent the events playing out before their eyes are rooted years, if not decades, in the past.
This is yet again the case for the war that has just erupted between Israel and Iran — particularly with respect to the role of the United States.
Benjamin Netanyahu has intermittently served as prime minister and leader of the opposition in Israel for nearly 30 years. From the very beginning, with his party, he adopted a fundamental geopolitical vision: to assure its survival, Israel must dominate the region. In order to dominate the region, it must destabilize, even overthrow, the regimes of hostile neighboring countries. And, to that end, it has had to rely on the support of the American giant.
By the turn of the 21st century, a list of regimes to topple had to be compiled: Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq … and Iran.
A quarter of a century later, one thing is clear. All of the above countries have been subject to destabilization, airstrikes, or even invasion, and, more often than not, the U.S. was directly involved in the conflict.
For any American president, saying no to Israel is extremely difficult. This was the case under Joe Biden, and it is again with Donald Trump. And what is extraordinary about this dynamic is that a tiny state, both in size and population, is leading the biggest player on the international stage by the nose. It is a very close-knit relationship that we can explain in a number of ways, as detailed in another column.
It is not by chance that, since the start of hostilities, Netanyahu has appeared on American television claiming — without proof — that Iran was behind the two assassination attempts on Trump, and that, “Today it’s Tel Aviv, tomorrow it’s New York” that will be under attack. Once again, he is seeking to drag the American giant into the fray. In Trump’s case, this dynamic, should it lead to a major escalation with Iran, could be highly dangerous politically, from both a national and international standpoint.
In the U.S., such an escalation threatens to splinter Trump’s political and electoral coalition, perhaps more than any other issue.
It is both the Republican Party AND the president’s Cabinet that are divided, with, on one side, Pete Hegseth, Keith Kellogg and Marco Rubio in the pro-Israel interventionist corner and, on the other, JD Vance, Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who favor a U.S. retreat as the world’s policeman, especially in the Middle East.
Internationally, the rapprochement with the Arab world sought by Trump since his return to power would be jeopardized.
Before his appearance at the Group of 7 Summit in Alberta, it was with great enthusiasm last month that the president made the first diplomatic visit of his current term to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Trump declared his desire to be the peace president and to see the Middle East dominated by “commerce, not chaos.” It is a project which has just been shattered.
Added to this is the economic dimension, especially where energy prices are concerned.
Over the years, major armed conflicts in the Middle East have had very different effects on the price of oil. The Yom Kippur War and the Islamic Revolution, actually in Iran, both brought about significant oil shocks in 1973 and 1979, respectively.
For its part, the Iran-Iraq War, which began in 1980, had a considerably smaller impact. Ten years later, Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait saw a sharp rise in oil prices, which then quickly stabilized after U.S. involvement to protect its interests in the region.
In any case, one thing is certain: Trump does not need volatility in oil prices. He spent the better part of the last two years hammering home that inflation issues observed since 2021 were principally caused by energy prices. And, according to a recent CBS poll, the approval rating on his handling of inflation, still the No. 1 concern in America, sits below 40%.
When an international crisis occurs, media outlets characteristically report on what is happening right now: the bombing, the destruction, the death. As a result, the public often fails to comprehend to what extent the events playing out before their eyes are rooted years, if not decades, in the past.
This is yet again the case for the war that has just erupted between Israel and Iran — particularly with respect to the role of the United States.
Benjamin Netanyahu has intermittently served as prime minister and leader of the opposition in Israel for nearly 30 years. From the very beginning, with his party, he adopted a fundamental geopolitical vision: to assure its survival, Israel must dominate the region. In order to dominate the region, it must destabilize, even overthrow, the regimes of hostile neighboring countries. And, to that end, it has had to rely on the support of the American giant.
By the turn of the 21st century, a list of regimes to topple had to be compiled: Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq … and Iran.
A quarter of a century later, one thing is clear. All of the above countries have been subject to destabilization, airstrikes, or even invasion, and, more often than not, the U.S. was directly involved in the conflict.
For any American president, saying no to Israel is extremely difficult. This was the case under Joe Biden, and it is again with Donald Trump. And what is extraordinary about this dynamic is that a tiny state, both in size and population, is leading the biggest player on the international stage by the nose. It is a very close-knit relationship that we can explain in a number of ways, as detailed in another column.
It is not by chance that, since the start of hostilities, Netanyahu has appeared on American television claiming — without proof — that Iran was behind the two assassination attempts on Trump, and that, “Today it’s Tel Aviv, tomorrow it’s New York” that will be under attack. Once again, he is seeking to drag the American giant into the fray. In Trump’s case, this dynamic, should it lead to a major escalation with Iran, could be highly dangerous politically, from both a national and international standpoint.
In the U.S., such an escalation threatens to splinter Trump’s political and electoral coalition, perhaps more than any other issue.
It is both the Republican Party AND the president’s Cabinet that are divided, with, on one side, Pete Hegseth, Keith Kellogg and Marco Rubio in the pro-Israel interventionist corner and, on the other, JD Vance, Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who favor a U.S. retreat as the world’s policeman, especially in the Middle East.
Internationally, the rapprochement with the Arab world sought by Trump since his return to power would be jeopardized.
Before his appearance at the Group of 7 Summit in Alberta, it was with great enthusiasm last month that the president made the first diplomatic visit of his current term to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Trump declared his desire to be the peace president and to see the Middle East dominated by “commerce, not chaos.” It is a project which has just been shattered.
Added to this is the economic dimension, especially where energy prices are concerned.
Over the years, major armed conflicts in the Middle East have had very different effects on the price of oil. The Yom Kippur War and the Islamic Revolution, actually in Iran, both brought about significant oil shocks in 1973 and 1979, respectively.
For its part, the Iran-Iraq War, which began in 1980, had a considerably smaller impact. Ten years later, Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait saw a sharp rise in oil prices, which then quickly stabilized after U.S. involvement to protect its interests in the region.
In any case, one thing is certain: Trump does not need volatility in oil prices. He spent the better part of the last two years hammering home that inflation issues observed since 2021 were principally caused by energy prices. And, according to a recent CBS poll, the approval rating on his handling of inflation, still the No. 1 concern in America, sits below 40%.
Previous article![]( "What if Trump Has Just Started Another ‘Forever War’?")
Next article![]( "After Me, the Deluge")
