For decades, the US-Israeli relations were described by analysts as strong and unshakable, based on their mutual regional and international interests.
The US was the primary supporter of the Hebrew state since its foundation, and throughout the five regional wars starting with the 1948 Nakba, and the establishment of the state of Israel. This was followed by the 1967 war with Egypt’s Abdul Nasser allied with Syria and Jordan, and the 1973 with Egypt and Syria, during which Israel proved to be a dominant military power.
US support was thought to be unlimited before the outbreak of the war in Gaza, triggered by Hamas’ unprecedented attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, dubbed “Al-Aqsa Flood.” Tel Aviv retaliated by carrying out a devastating invasion of the tiny enclave that has so far claimed the lives of more than 37,000 Palestinians. Eight months into the conflict, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has yet to achieve the main objective of eliminating Hamas.
Netanyahu’s repeated rejection of US calls for a ceasefire and to prevent escalation caused tensions in US-Israeli relations. US President Joe Biden warned Netanyahu against invading Rafah, in southern Gaza, threatening to suspend US supply of bombs and artillery shells to Israel.
President and CEO of the American Task Force on Lebanon, Ambassador Ed Gabriel, points out that “before the Gaza war, current and past US administrations and the US Congress had unconditional support for Israel. Little if any disputes between the two countries ever went public, and heads of state never expressed displeasure with their counterparts.”
In an interview with This is Beirut, Gabriel affirms that “after the Gaza war there has been an increase in calls for accountability in the relationship. The US-Israel relationship continues to enjoy broad bipartisan support, but we are seeing more and more lawmakers convey that there should be a more defined or even conditioned relationship between US support for Israel and Israel’s human rights record. And those differences are now public between the two governments and heads of state. This is not to say that the Israeli-US relationship has been fundamentally changed, as Israel maintains wide support in Washington.”
“I think that the US is doing some soul-searching on how it can both continue to support Israel as its closest regional ally while also delivering some tough messages to the current Israeli government that it needs to support a viable two-state solution and that its campaign in Gaza has violated international humanitarian law on numerous occasions,” Gabriel said. He stressed that “a key question for the US to ask itself is what steps is it willing to take, beyond rhetoric, to compel Israel to change both its tactics and approach.”
A political source, requesting anonymity, believes that “the current rift between the US and Israel is not that deep.”
According to the source, the tense relations “are the result of bad chemistry between the US administration and Netanyahu’s cabinet, which insists on continuing war to extend its own lifespan.” “The US will disagree with Netanyahu but will never diverge from the principle of supporting the Hebrew state since they see Israel as the 51st state.”
“Both are lifetime allies and will never diverge. America might have issues with Netanyahu but that doesn’t mean they are not supporting the Israelis anymore. What they are doing now is showing pressure to preserve their image as supporters of peace and freedom, and at the same time keeping their untouchable relation maintained with Israel,” the source added.
Matters become clearer when it comes to Lebanon. On October 7, the Iranian-backed Hezbollah launched its so-called “support front” of Hamas in South Lebanon. The US repeatedly called on Israel to avoid escalation on the Lebanese border because Hezbollah enjoys more military capabilities than Hamas and has the ability of dragging other militias in case of escalation. In this case, the US may be compelled to join the war next to Israel, which would be fighting on several fronts at the same time.
Israel has so far heeded US demands to limit the clashes with the pro-Iranian formation to South Lebanon, and occasionally the Beqaa. Unlike the war in 2006, when bridges were destroyed across Lebanon and the suburbs of Beirut were constantly shelled, Israel has been conducting targeted killings of members of Hezbollah and its allies.
Ambassador Gabriel contends that “Israel will not accept the pre-October 7 status quo with Hezbollah perched on its doorstep. Vested interests on both sides of the border have voiced support for UN Resolution 1701 as the means to achieve stability on the border.”
“Israel has been very clear that it wants to see a buffer zone in southern Lebanon and that it is willing to advance this goal through either diplomacy or force,” he said, stressing that “it is in the US and, I would say, Israel’s interest for this to be achieved diplomatically.”
“Israel and Hezbollah should stop further provocations and take advantage of this potential opportunity,” he added.
The US was the primary supporter of the Hebrew state since its foundation, and throughout the five regional wars starting with the 1948 Nakba, and the establishment of the state of Israel. This was followed by the 1967 war with Egypt’s Abdul Nasser allied with Syria and Jordan, and the 1973 with Egypt and Syria, during which Israel proved to be a dominant military power.
US support was thought to be unlimited before the outbreak of the war in Gaza, triggered by Hamas’ unprecedented attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, dubbed “Al-Aqsa Flood.” Tel Aviv retaliated by carrying out a devastating invasion of the tiny enclave that has so far claimed the lives of more than 37,000 Palestinians. Eight months into the conflict, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has yet to achieve the main objective of eliminating Hamas.
Netanyahu’s repeated rejection of US calls for a ceasefire and to prevent escalation caused tensions in US-Israeli relations. US President Joe Biden warned Netanyahu against invading Rafah, in southern Gaza, threatening to suspend US supply of bombs and artillery shells to Israel.
President and CEO of the American Task Force on Lebanon, Ambassador Ed Gabriel, points out that “before the Gaza war, current and past US administrations and the US Congress had unconditional support for Israel. Little if any disputes between the two countries ever went public, and heads of state never expressed displeasure with their counterparts.”
In an interview with This is Beirut, Gabriel affirms that “after the Gaza war there has been an increase in calls for accountability in the relationship. The US-Israel relationship continues to enjoy broad bipartisan support, but we are seeing more and more lawmakers convey that there should be a more defined or even conditioned relationship between US support for Israel and Israel’s human rights record. And those differences are now public between the two governments and heads of state. This is not to say that the Israeli-US relationship has been fundamentally changed, as Israel maintains wide support in Washington.”
“I think that the US is doing some soul-searching on how it can both continue to support Israel as its closest regional ally while also delivering some tough messages to the current Israeli government that it needs to support a viable two-state solution and that its campaign in Gaza has violated international humanitarian law on numerous occasions,” Gabriel said. He stressed that “a key question for the US to ask itself is what steps is it willing to take, beyond rhetoric, to compel Israel to change both its tactics and approach.”
A political source, requesting anonymity, believes that “the current rift between the US and Israel is not that deep.”
According to the source, the tense relations “are the result of bad chemistry between the US administration and Netanyahu’s cabinet, which insists on continuing war to extend its own lifespan.” “The US will disagree with Netanyahu but will never diverge from the principle of supporting the Hebrew state since they see Israel as the 51st state.”
“Both are lifetime allies and will never diverge. America might have issues with Netanyahu but that doesn’t mean they are not supporting the Israelis anymore. What they are doing now is showing pressure to preserve their image as supporters of peace and freedom, and at the same time keeping their untouchable relation maintained with Israel,” the source added.
Matters become clearer when it comes to Lebanon. On October 7, the Iranian-backed Hezbollah launched its so-called “support front” of Hamas in South Lebanon. The US repeatedly called on Israel to avoid escalation on the Lebanese border because Hezbollah enjoys more military capabilities than Hamas and has the ability of dragging other militias in case of escalation. In this case, the US may be compelled to join the war next to Israel, which would be fighting on several fronts at the same time.
Israel has so far heeded US demands to limit the clashes with the pro-Iranian formation to South Lebanon, and occasionally the Beqaa. Unlike the war in 2006, when bridges were destroyed across Lebanon and the suburbs of Beirut were constantly shelled, Israel has been conducting targeted killings of members of Hezbollah and its allies.
Ambassador Gabriel contends that “Israel will not accept the pre-October 7 status quo with Hezbollah perched on its doorstep. Vested interests on both sides of the border have voiced support for UN Resolution 1701 as the means to achieve stability on the border.”
“Israel has been very clear that it wants to see a buffer zone in southern Lebanon and that it is willing to advance this goal through either diplomacy or force,” he said, stressing that “it is in the US and, I would say, Israel’s interest for this to be achieved diplomatically.”
“Israel and Hezbollah should stop further provocations and take advantage of this potential opportunity,” he added.
Read more
Comments