No foreign leader has easier access to President Donald Trump than Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose scheduled meeting today at Mar-a-Lago will be the fifth time he’s hobnobbed with the US president in the past 10 months. In February, Netanyahu was the first overseas dignitary to visit the White House in Trump’s second term, and now the year ends with another meeting. Few foreign leaders have buttered up Trump with the aplomb of Netanyahu, who describes Trump as Israel’s “greatest friend.”

In Trump’s first four years in office, these enthusiastic words were more than earned. As Al Jazeera noted, “During his first term, Trump pushed US policy further in favour of Israel’s right-wing government. He moved the US embassy to Jerusalem, recognised and claimed Israeli sovereignty over Syria’s occupied Golan Heights and cut off funding to the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA).”

The situation in Trump’s second term is more complicated. Small but significant disagreements have opened up between Israel and the United States. Trump’s push for a foreign policy more focused on the Western Hemisphere—which includes bombing putative drug boats and threatening regime change in Venezuela—depends on shifting military resources away from Europe and the Middle East. In the National Security Strategy release in November, the Trump administration argued that the Middle East is “emerging as a place of partnership, friendship and investment.” Ironically, Trump’s pursuit of a pivot away from the Middle East is a continuation of unsuccessful efforts for a lighter US footprint in the region pursued by his predecessors Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

Trump’s peace plans for the region have a pie-in-the-sky feel. They would entail the United States offshoring its military presence while pushing for a closer integration of its Arab allies with Israel and the emergence of a new government in Gaza. As Roger Cohen, Paris bureau chief for The New York Times, dryly noted, “Such optimism, based in large part on the Gaza peace agreement signed in Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt, on Oct. 13, looks overblown, much like President Trump’s claim that day that it took 3,000 years to reach a breakthrough of this kind.”

Current Issue

May 2026 Issue

One of the biggest hurdles to Trump’s vision of a new Middle East is that Israel is having none of it. While Trump touts his ceasefire, Israel has continued to bomb Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria. In his meeting with Trump, Netanyahu is expected to push for a renewed bombing campaign against Iran as well.

Netanyahu has no interest in the Middle East becoming a place of “partnership, friendship and investment.” Rather, the Israeli leader’s strategy is clearly one of maintaining regional hegemony by promoting chaos. This is the tried-and-true imperialist method of divide-and-conquer.

The conflicting goals of the United States and Israel can be most clearly seen in Syria. Cohen argues that there is ground for hope in the end of the civil war in Syria, with a unified nation now being rebuilt under the leadership of President Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former jihadi who has pursued a policy of reconciliation. As Cohen noted:

Remarkable progress has, however, also been made in a year. Mr. al-Sharaa has garnered support from the United States, Russia and China. He has secured the lifting of economic sanctions. He has remained steady in the face of repeated military provocations from Israel, and has begun to lay the basis of state institutions. He has been embraced by Mr. Trump and was ushered to the White House last month.

Unfortunately, while Israel and its Arab allies are backing Syrian reconstruction, Netanyahu’s government is seeking security by keeping Syria divided. On December 23, a Washington Post report documented that Israel had been arming Druze militiamen in Syria who want a separate state. According to the report, “Some Israeli and American analysts argue that Israel’s aggressive use of military force in Syria and its clandestine efforts to promote Druze separatism were counterproductive and undercut relations at a time when Sharaa appeared eager to reach a diplomatic détente.”

Dana Stroul, a former senior Pentagon official, told the Washington Post:

“There has been growing frustration in Washington that Israeli actions were setting back something most of Washington and everyone in the Middle East would actually like to see succeed: a stabilized, unified Syria. The basic argument to Israel is, look, you actually have leaders in Damascus who are willing to say the word ‘Israel’ and talk about a potential future with normalized relations, yet you just keep bombing or looking for a surrogate to work through.”

Trump styles himself as an American First nationalist. There is every reason to oppose Israel’s belligerent foreign policy in terms of American national interest as well as on the grounds of international peace. It’s hard to find any rational benefit for the United States in Syria’s sinking back into chaos or in Iran’s being bombed. Further, criticism of Israel’s belligerence is rising not just among liberals but also on the MAGA right, with voices such as Marjorie Taylor Greene and Tucker Carlson warning of the dangers of more Middle Eastern wars.

Despite this shifting political landscape, there’s no reason to put any faith in Trump’s standing up to Netanyahu. Everything in Trump’s record indicates that his handling of foreign policy is fundamentally feckless and that he’s easily swayed by hawkish voices who remain powerful inside the Republican Party. While there are areas of disagreements between Netanyahu and Trump, the more crucial difference is between how invested each is in their policy preferences. Netanyahu is heavily invested in his vision of Israel as a hegemonic power in the Middle East that is willing to spread chaos to fend off any possible foe. Trump, by contrast, has no deep policy commitments, which makes him vulnerable to the suasion of Netanyahu and the pro-Israel lobby. Trump’s peace plans are a flimsy house of cards, which Netanyahu will easily topple.