Israel, Ally or Strategic Burden? An Unprecedented American Debate

With the eruption of the second Israeli-American-Iranian war, questions and observations crowd around this great conflict that will, beyond any doubt, reshape the face of the region and the world, leaving in its wake profound consequences for the future of the Middle East and the nature of its political relations. The following are perhaps the most significant observations:

— It is clear that this war was not well prepared. Despite the elimination of the Supreme Leader, Iran's Defense Minister, and the supreme command in the very first hours, Iran's command-and-control architecture is equally clearly decentralized — as evidenced by the uninterrupted volleys of missiles fired in every direction. The inability of the United States and Israel to strike Iran's Second Strike Capability confirms this impression. The wager on a wave of protests sweeping across Iran has likewise failed and cannot be relied upon. Nor can one overlook the fact that the Iranian fighter operates from a religious doctrine in which martyrdom is not feared but sought as both goal and gain.

— Alongside Iran's considerable losses, one cannot avert one's gaze from the fact that Iranian missiles have already destroyed all American military bases in the Gulf states, according to a striking report published by The New York Times — a fact that raises the serious and probing question of whether American immersion in this war truly serves "the national interest of the United States." Political commentary has multiplied, asserting that Israel has "entangled" Washington in this battle, informing it of its decision to go to war rather than seeking American approval, as previous Israeli governments habitually did before launching any military operation. This glissement, in turn, raises questions about Trump's pledge to stop all wars and his boast of having ended at least eight of them.

— There is no political or legal cover for this war, neither at the international level — with a deliberate bypassing of the United Nations and all its bodies — nor at the domestic American level, President Donald Trump having entirely circumvented Congress without seeking its approval, disregarding America's political institutions and its Constitution.

— The debate within the United States is widening over the true objectives of the war and whether Iran genuinely poses a threat to American national security. Tehran has long raised the banner of "Death to America" and stands accused of numerous attacks against American forces — that much is true. But the serious discussion turns on whether Iran actually threatens American domestic security, and whether going to war is the optimal response to the challenge it represents. This debate returns, inevitably, to Israel: the threat is aimed at Israel, not America, and it is Israel that has drawn the United States into this conflict. Washington is paying a far higher price than Israel itself.

— Iran's bombardment of the Gulf states ought to impel the United States to think deeply about its ramifications, and to make an unavoidable comparison: the Gulf states contribute to the American economy through arms and non-arms deals worth billions of dollars, while Israel has cost Washington tens of billions of dollars annually since the Nakba of 1948. Is there not a growing American sense that Israel has become more of a "strategic burden" than a genuine "strategic ally"? It is a serious political debate circulating in many American circles.

Whatever the case may be, the region is open to every possibility. Israel's ambition to dominate the region and bite off its lands one by one may prove no easy task, given the sweeping transformations now unfolding across the Middle East. Its policy — built on the refusal to recognize the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, on the perpetuation of the occupation of the 1967 lands, on decades of complete indifference toward every peace initiative, and on the rejection of every proposed solution — cannot endure forever.

Who said that Arab acceptance — and non-Arab acceptance — of Israel's total dominion over the region would come within easy reach, even if Arab performance over the past decades has been disappointing and inadequate in confronting the mounting challenges posed by the Israeli project at each of its stages — from the establishment of the Zionist state on the lands of historical Palestine, to the progressive encroachment on other Arab lands, to the refusal to establish an independent Palestinian state, to the prevention of refugee return or any understanding on arrangements for Jerusalem, up to the collapse of every political and moral barrier in the recent war on Gaza, where the number of martyrs has approached seventy thousand civilians and innocents?

The region has entered a painful labor, and emerging from this war will be far harder than entering it. The events to come will bear witness to that.