In many ways, the US-Israel partnership is still stuck in the twentieth century.
The enduring mantra of the “unbreakable bond” between the United States and Israel has become so entrenched in American political discourse that questioning its strategic logic is often dismissed as a form of heresy. Yet, as the Middle East continues to evolve and American interests face new challenges globally, it’s time for a sober reassessment of this relationship through the lens of classical realpolitik rather than emotional attachment or domestic political calculations.
A Cold War Legacy Outlives Its Usefulness
The US-Israel partnership was largely forged during the Cold War, when Israel served as a valuable strategic asset against Soviet influence in the Middle East. Israel’s military capabilities, intelligence cooperation, and democratic governance made it an attractive ally in a region dominated by authoritarian regimes often aligned with Moscow. However, the Cold War ended over three decades ago, and the strategic landscape has undergone a fundamental shift.
Today’s Middle East is defined not by superpower competition but by sectarian conflicts, failed states, and regional power struggles that often have little bearing on core American interests. The notion that Israel remains an indispensable strategic asset deserves scrutiny. Has the relationship evolved beyond its original strategic rationale into something driven more by inertia, domestic politics, and ideological affinity than by clear-eyed national interest calculations?
Israel’s “Tail-Wagging” Problem
American foreign policy toward the Middle East has increasingly become hostage to the imperatives of the US-Israel relationship rather than vice versa. This dynamic creates what strategists call a “tail wagging the dog” problem, where the client state’s interests begin to drive the patron’s policies rather than serving the interests of the patron.
Consider the repeated cycles of conflict in Gaza, the West Bank settlement expansion that complicates any peace process, or Israel’s confrontational approach toward Iran. Each of these issues forces Washington into uncomfortable positions where American diplomats must either provide unconditional support for Israeli actions or engage in the awkward dance of public backing coupled with private pressure. Neither approach serves American credibility or effectiveness in the region.
The massive annual aid package—currently exceeding $3.8 billion—represents not just a significant financial commitment but a strategic straitjacket. It signals to regional actors that America’s Middle East policy is predetermined rather than responsive to changing circumstances and American interests.
The Landscape of the New Middle East
The Middle East of 2024 bears little resemblance to the region where the US-Israel partnership was conceived. The Abraham Accords demonstrated that Arab-Israeli normalization could proceed without resolving the Palestinian issue—a reality that undermines traditional assumptions about regional dynamics. Meanwhile, the rise of new powers like Turkey and the UAE, the ongoing rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and the emergence of non-state actors as major players have created a multipolar regional system.
In this new environment, America’s exclusive partnership with Israel may actually limit rather than enhance US influence. Other regional powers view Washington’s unconditional support for Israeli positions as evidence that America cannot serve as an honest broker in regional disputes. This perception diminishes American diplomatic leverage precisely when sophisticated statecraft is most needed.
The China Challenge
Perhaps most importantly, the United States faces an unprecedented strategic challenge from China that requires a fundamental reorientation of American resources and attention toward the Indo-Pacific. Every dollar spent on Middle Eastern commitments, every diplomatic crisis triggered by regional conflicts, and every moment of presidential attention devoted to the Israeli-Palestinian disputes represents an opportunity cost in the competition that will define the twenty-first century.
The question American strategists should ask is not whether Israel is a friend or ally—it clearly is—but whether the current structure of the relationship serves America’s broader strategic interests in an era of great power competition. Does unlimited support for Israeli policies in the occupied territories advance American competitiveness vis-à-vis China? Does it strengthen America’s position in Africa, Latin America, or Southeast Asia, where many nations view Israeli settlement policies as violations of international law?
Toward a More Balanced US-Israel Partnership
None of this suggests that the United States should abandon Israel or dramatically alter the fundamental friendship between the two democracies. Rather, it calls for a more mature, balanced relationship based on mutual respect and clear-eyed assessment of respective interests rather than romantic notions of indissoluble bonds.
Such a relationship would involve honest conversations about where American and Israeli interests align and where they diverge. It would mean American aid and support coming with expectations of responsible behavior, just as it does with other allies. It would require Israeli recognition that American support cannot be taken for granted and must be earned through policies that advance rather than complicate American regional objectives.
Most importantly, it would mean liberating American Middle East policy from the assumption that Israeli and American interests are identical in all circumstances. They are not, and pretending otherwise serves neither nation well.
The time has come to move beyond the Cold War paradigms that have shaped the US-Israel relationship and toward a partnership more suitable for the strategic challenges of the twenty-first century. This means less unconditional support and more conditional friendship—the hallmark of sustainable alliances between sovereign nations with distinct interests and responsibilities.
About the Author: Leon Hadar
Dr. Leon Hadar is a contributing editor with The National Interest, a Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI) in Philadelphia, and a former research fellow in foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute. He has taught at American University in Washington, DC, and the University of Maryland, College Park. A columnist and blogger for Haaretz (Israel) and a Washington correspondent for The Business Times of Singapore, he is a former United Nations bureau chief for The Jerusalem Post.
Image: Noam Galai / Shutterstock.com.
