Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was among the first world leaders to congratulate Donald J. Trump before he was officially declared the winner of the 2024 US presidential election.
In a post on X, Netanyahu hailed Trump’s “huge victory” as “history’s greatest comeback,” sharing a photo of himself, his wife Sara, and Trump at Mar-a-Lago in July.
Netanyahu’s congratulations to Trump were echoed by other members of his far-right coalition, including newly appointed Defence Minister Israel Katz, following Netanyahu’s recent firing of Yoav Gallant over a breakdown in ‘trust’.
But while top Israeli officials welcomed Trump’s return, seeing it as a boost to their Middle East policies, they still have to deal with lame duck President Joe Biden for the next ten weeks before Trump’s inauguration as the 47th US President on 20 January 2025.
Despite Biden having limited power, he potentially still could influence the course of events in the Middle East.
It wouldn’t be the first time. In 2000, with Bill Clinton already in his de facto lame duck phase as his second term neared its end, he hosted the Camp David peace summit. While these talks ultimately failed, they marked a significant effort.
Barack Obama in his final days, meanwhile, broke from traditional US policy by abstaining from a UN vote in late 2016 that condemned Israeli settlements, signalling a shift in the longstanding approach to resolutions critical of Israel.
More recently, in late 2020, Donald Trump made moves that foreshadowed the future, reducing US troop levels in Afghanistan and Iraq and signalling the eventual withdrawal under Biden. He also brokered the Abraham Accords, securing Morocco’s normalisation of ties with Israel, and imposed new sanctions on Iran.
But when it comes to Biden, experts believe he is unlikely to act to end Israel’s wars in the Middle East.
“Even when Biden had the power, he failed to use America’s leverage, and now, as a lame duck, Netanyahu would not take any of Biden’s requests seriously,” Karim Emile Bitar, a professor of international relations at St. Joseph’s University in Beirut, told The New Arab.
Fawaz Gerges, professor of international relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), explained that Israel’s wars in Gaza and Lebanon are as much Biden’s as Netanyahu’s, with the US providing over $18 billion in arms, ammunition, logistics, and intelligence support since 7 October, in addition to $3.8 billion in annual aid.
“Israel could not have killed as many people in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon without America’s active support,” he told TNA.
|
|
But when analysing what Biden could potentially do to halt hostilities in the region, Timothy Kaldas, deputy director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, explained that Biden still has leverage to withhold military aid in concert with European allies, especially after Israel ignored US warnings on Gaza aid. This could pressure Israel toward negotiations.
“The last thing that Biden should do to further cement a disastrous legacy in foreign policy would be to let Trump inherit an uncontained and unleashed Netanyahu that is expanding conflicts in the region,” he told TNA.
Since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza and Lebanon, the Biden administration has been supplying Israel with billions in arms and providing logistical and intelligence support while simultaneously calling for a ceasefire. Biden’s approach to Israel’s wars seems to have weakened US influence in the region.
What Trump would inherit from the Biden administration, unless things change, would be Israel at war on at least two fronts: in Gaza, to destroy Hamas, in the process so far killing over 43,000 Palestinians, and a second front against Hezbollah in Lebanon, which has led to 3,000 deaths.
Meanwhile, direct military exchanges between Iran and Israel have fuelled tensions across the region, while Yemen’s Houthis continue to attack commercial vessels in the Red Sea.
On the diplomatic side, except for last year’s brief Gaza truce in November, the efforts of the Biden administration, including US-backed ceasefire proposals for Gaza and Lebanon, have produced no results.
In this context, the Israeli leadership likely sees Biden’s lame duck period as an opportunity to escalate the conflict.
“Netanyahu has outsmarted and outmanoeuvred Biden, putting all his eggs in the Trump basket, and his gamble has paid off. Even if Biden uses leverage, Netanyahu will refuse to end the war, hoping Trump will give him the green light to act freely,” Gerges notes.
But there is more. Netanyahu’s political survival depends on prolonging the war to avoid domestic and international accountability, as the International Criminal Court (ICC) may issue an arrest warrant at any moment for the prime minister and other Israeli leaders.
“Netanyahu is using the conflict to protect his political career, sidelining those like Gallant who don’t prioritise his survival. This perpetuates the conflict to suit his personal interests despite its dangers,” Kaldas said.
While for Israel’s top officials Biden may already represent the past, Trump’s record on the Middle East during his first term may not provide enough context for future policy, as the region has drastically changed due to Israel’s ongoing wars.
During his first term, Donald Trump proved to be a staunch ally for Israel, instituting a number of key policy changes that greatly benefitted Tel Aviv. He relocated the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, recognised the Syrian Golan Heights as part of Israel, and announced that Israel’s West Bank settlements did not constitute a violation of international law.
These actions broke with decades of US foreign policy and were welcomed by many in Israel, though they angered Palestinians and the international community. Trump also brokered the Abraham Accords that normalised relations between Israel and several Arab nations.
However, Trump has said he wants to put a halt to endless wars and avoid further US political or military involvement in conflicts during his mandate. How he could achieve that in the Middle East, though, is still uncertain.
One of Trump’s potential strategies may involve strengthening or revitalising the Israeli-Saudi normalisation process, according to Bitar.
“Trump might try to bypass Saudi Arabia’s request to resolve Palestinian statehood by making the usual promises, claiming there’s a pathway to it while pressuring the Saudis to re-engage with Israel. This could come as part of a US-Saudi package including security guarantees and military cooperation,” he said.
However, another scenario suggests that Trump’s approach could empower Netanyahu to pursue aggressive policies with minimal restraint.
|
|
Gerges argues that Netanyahu is expected to feel more confident due to close ties between his circle and Trump’s, which includes hawkish voices that align ideologically with Israel’s Likud-led coalition. This convergence of interests could easily push Israel and the US into a broader conflict with Iran and its regional allies.
In this context, Bitar added that though Trump is not generally seen as a warmonger, he has shown a willingness to use force, and many around him would use his narcissism to push for their own agendas.
“Netanyahu hopes Trump will give him the green light to do whatever he wants in Gaza, in the West Bank, in Lebanon. But his greatest prize is neither Hamas nor Hezbollah. It is Iran’s nuclear program. It is regime change in Tehran,” Gerges said.
However, this scenario would concern Arab leaders, including Saudi Arabia, because it would affect the entire region’s stability, Bitar argues.
This could also affect Trump, who is viewed as a businessman with strong relationships with Arab leaders, many of whom welcomed his election victory.
Additionally, active US involvement in Middle Eastern wars does not align with his foreign policy, which is expected to prioritise economic competition with China.
But because of his transactional nature and his relationship with Netanyahu, Kaldas suspects that Trump’s approach could lead him to advocate for the further Israeli annexation of occupied Palestinian territories as a way to incentivise an end to hostilities in Lebanon.
While Trump is more likely than Biden to prioritise an end to the fighting in Lebanon, this strategy poses a real risk of complicating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Dario Sabaghi is a freelance journalist interested in human rights
Follow him on Twitter:Â @DarioSabaghi
