Trump, Netanyahu’s Shared Secret!

By Dr Hasan Al Dajah

Since his arrival on the American political scene, Donald Trump has been an exceptional case in the United States’ relationship with Israel. Historically described as a strategic alliance, this relationship has transformed under Trump into a personal partnership between him and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This relationship has deepened to an unprecedented degree, with Trump becoming one of the most biased and supportive American presidents toward Netanyahu, not only in foreign policy decisions but also on issues of a purely Israeli domestic nature, such as the ongoing trials against Netanyahu or calls for early elections.

What drives Trump to this level of involvement in Israeli domestic affairs? And why does he insist on defending Netanyahu despite the criticism and accusations against him? In the current Israeli landscape, Netanyahu faces significant domestic challenges related to multiple corruption trials, in addition to escalating tensions within the ruling coalition, particularly with the religious parties, which have expressed on more than one occasion their desire to dissolve the Knesset and call for early elections. These parties, despite being partners in the government, view continuing under Netanyahu’s leadership as a political burden due to the corruption cases and poor performance in some cases. This recently prompted them to propose a vote within the Knesset to call for new elections.

In this context, Trump’s position was clearly supportive of Netanyahu, expressing his rejection of any attempt to remove Netanyahu from power and considering his continued rule essential to Israel’s stability and its security and political future. Even stranger are the reported interventions by Trump or his circle in the matter of Netanyahu’s trial. It has been reported—through both official and unofficial channels—that he called for a pardon or an end to the legal proceedings against him, arguing that these trials are politically motivated and that Netanyahu is being subjected to an unfair campaign by the Israeli judiciary. This intervention raises many questions, most importantly: What is Trump’s interest in Netanyahu’s survival? Why would he risk his political reputation for the sake of being a foreign leader facing criminal charges?

The answer to these questions requires examining the nature of the relationship between the two men. Since Trump assumed the presidency in 2017, he has pursued an unprecedented agenda in support of Israel, including moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing Israel’s sovereignty over the occupied Syrian Golan Heights, and supporting the “Deal of the Century,” considered the most biased in the history of US mediation.

All these measures were met with widespread acclaim and celebration by Netanyahu, who used them in his election campaign to bolster his domestic popularity, portraying himself as capable of bringing absolute US support to Israel.

In turn, Trump found in Netanyahu a reliable ally who reflects his vision for the Middle East and helps him win the support of a pivotal electoral base within the United States: evangelical Christians. People must realize that the true backbone of support for Israel in America is not the Jewish community, but evangelicals, who constitute approximately 25% of the population, compared to less than 2% of American Jews.

Therefore, Trump—as he has stated on more than one occasion—considers engaging with evangelicals more effective than appeasing the Jews, because they constitute a formidable lobbying force pushing for American policies aligned with the Israeli right-wing agenda, and view support for Israel as part of the Christian Zionist religious doctrine. These people see Netanyahu as the leader most qualified to preserve the “Jewishness of the state” and advance policies of expansion and hegemony.

Accordingly, Netanyahu’s downfall, or even his trial, represents a threat not only to Trump, but also to the political and ideological system he has meticulously crafted during his presidency. It is impossible to trust that potential Israeli alternatives will maintain the same level of loyalty or pursue the same confrontational approach toward Iran and the Palestinians.

Hence, for Trump, defending Netanyahu becomes a defense of a broader regional project that keeps Israel at the forefront of the confrontation with Tehran and strengthens right-wing populist alliances globally.

Moreover, Trump himself faces investigations and legal prosecutions in the United States, whether related to his attempt to overturn the election results, his retention of classified documents after leaving the White House, or various financial issues. Therefore, his defense of Netanyahu may be implicitly understood as self-defense. He seeks to establish the principle that the trial of political leaders is primarily a selective political process, not a fair judicial process. If Netanyahu is able to escape accountability or obtain a pardon, Trump will see this as a precedent that will strengthen his argument before the American judiciary and domestic public opinion.

Strategically, Trump does not view Israel merely as a traditional ally, but rather as an extension of his global political vision based on isolation from international institutions, undermining the liberal multilateral order, and strengthening bilateral alliances with strong leaders who share his political style and confrontational personality. For him, Netanyahu is the Israeli version of this model: a leader who clings to power despite internal and external pressures, fiercely confronts the media and the judiciary, and relies on a solid right-wing popular base fueled by a sense of existential danger and threat.

From this perspective, Trump’s support for Netanyahu is not limited to domestic issues but extends to regional security issues, most notably the open confrontation with Iran. Trump believes that an alliance with Netanyahu is necessary to sustain the escalation against Tehran and contain its influence in the region. Therefore, any weakening of Netanyahu, whether through elections or trials, is viewed as a direct blow to the axis of pressure on Iran and a threat to the deterrence strategy adopted by Trump during his presidency.

All of this explains why Trump supports Netanyahu and even intervenes in domestic issues, such as seeking a judicial pardon or rejecting early elections that could lead to Netanyahu’s removal from the political scene. It is a deeply mercenary relationship that transcends diplomatic protocol and extends to an ideological alliance between two leaders who each see the other as a mirror to their own selves and a first line of defense for their political and personal futures. Despite the criticism Trump faces for this involvement, he continues this approach without wavering, driven by an overwhelming desire to return to the White House and see a world shaped according to his own vision. In this world, there is no place for trials of political leaders, no room for elections that bring down allies, and only mutual loyalty, no matter the cost.

Dr Dajah is a professor of Strategic Studies at Al-Hussein Bin Talal University. He contributed this article to the Jordan Times.

Continue reading
Iran Emerges Strongest From This War

Dr. Salam al-Obeidi

In the finally analysis Iran still has about 600 kilograms – that is 60% enriched uranium – that it has hidden. Iran has nuclear physicists and it has technical capabilities. From a theoretical point of view, the amount of uranium ot still has could be enriched to 90%, fissile material that is needed for a nuclear bomb, within a few months. All that separates Iran from that is a fatwa made by its Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

We must remember that the conflict was imposed on Iran and therefore it was very important for Tehran to withdraw from it. And hence upon withdrawal, it symbolically bombed Israel again as a final show of force.

The world saw that the Iranians know how to fight and are ready for a major war (even though they don’t seek it). But Iran’s enemies are not ready for a major war. Realizing that the Iranian street would not revolt, they preferred to hold off. Netanyahu has so far been unable to drag the United States into a full-scale conflict with Iran. Without that, Israel can do nothing.

Israel has suffered heavy losses without achieving its primary goals. Netanyahu’s window of opportunity is about to close (unless he embarks on another adventure). Trump has emerged from the deadlock, as expected, similar to 2020. Now he’ll await the Nobel Prize.

At this point, it can be said that Israel has lost. It failed to drag the United States into a war aimed at destroying Iran, it did not eliminate the Iranian nuclear program, and did not change the regime in Iran.

Iran suffered damage, but it did not lose. In fact, it gained a lot.

The Iranians gained invaluable experience and learned many lessons. They saw all of Israel’s weaknesses, understood what to expect from whom in the region and the world. They tested their missiles in real combat against technologically-advanced powers.

Finally, the Iranians eliminated a huge number of internal enemies. Overall, they realized the magnitude of the disaster not before it was too late, but while they still had the time and strength to eliminate the threat. The purges in Iran will continue for a long time to come. This will strengthen the Supreme Leader’s authority.

As well, the positions of those in Iran who advocate for nuclear weapons have also been strengthened.

Dr al-Obeidi is an Iraqi writer and contributed this piece to Al Rai Al Youm.

Continue reading
Iran-Israel War: Cost And Opportunities!

By Mohammad Abu-Rumman

Benjamin Netanyahu has placed the Iranian regime, the Wilayat al-Faqih system, before a fateful challenge through a harsh pre-emptive strike. While extremely risky, the strike was not decisive enough to settle the confrontation. Netanyahu himself did not expect that an ideological-nationalist regime like Iran’s would surrender and offer immediate concessions following the strike, without launching a retaliatory blow against Israel.

Despite Iran’s unprecedented powerful strikes on Tel Aviv, the reformist current in Iran, represented by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, has also demonstrated its continued commitment to “the negotiating table” and to finding a way out of this war. Iran has deliberately avoided using its full missile capabilities against Israel to prevent the battle from reaching the point of no return.

Current indicators suggest that this war will likely not last long, nor will it expand geographically, because the destruction costs—for both sides—are immense. For Iran, this includes damage to its oil facilities, which are the backbone of its economy, as well as the protection of what remains of its nuclear program and infrastructure. For Israel, the fact that Iran managed to breach the Iron Dome and cause major direct damage in the heart of Tel Aviv and Haifa presents a reality that Israelis cannot endure.

In this light, there will likely come a tipping point at which both parties will be willing to end the conflict. The timing of that moment will be decided by the U.S. administration, which will step in to halt the military escalation. But when will this moment arrive? It will come when both sides realise that they can no longer achieve significant additional objectives, and that the cost of continuing the conflict far outweighs the cost of stopping it, especially given that a so-called “knockout blow” is impossible in such existential wars.

On the Israeli side, there are two major areas of superiority: First, Israel’s air force has successfully destroyed much of Iran’s air defense systems, allowing it to operate freely over Tehran and strike targets at will. Second, intelligence penetration, which could lead to further surprises that may force the Iranians to retreat or make subsequent concessions. However, Israel’s major vulnerability lies in its inability to withstand sustained, large-scale missile attacks, especially after a prolonged multi-front military conflict.

As for Iran, it has two primary objectives in the current military confrontation: To preserve the political legitimacy of the Wilayat al-Faqih regime, which is built on religious ideology and propaganda. Failing to respond or retreating now would reflect poorly internally and could erode the regime’s very source of legitimacy. To protect Iran’s deterrence capacity and prevent its regional standing from deteriorating—especially after losing the bulk of its regional influence in the aftermath of “Flood of al-Aqsa” (the Gaza war).

American intervention, whether military or diplomatic, will be decisive in ending this conflict. It is evident that President Donald Trump prefers a negotiated path, aiming for political, military, and economic gains. Netanyahu, however, is betting that a major military defeat for the Iranian regime will lead not only to concessions on its nuclear program (the primary stated objective) but potentially to changing or collapsing the regime itself, thereby neutralizing it within the regional power structure. This would constitute a strategic shift in the regional security equation in Israel’s favour.

Direct US military involvement remains unlikely, except in two scenarios: If Israel were to request assistance after a massive and successful missile strike against its territory. If the U.S. concludes that Iran will not back down unless there is a more dramatic shift in the military balance of power that compels it to return to the negotiating table and offer substantial concessions.

This equation was not the same two years ago. Back then, Iran had greater geopolitical space and extensive tools of influence in the region. However, what has occurred with the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s corridor (the Syrian axis), and the diminished power of Hezbollah and Hamas, has cost Iran critical advantages in the regional balance of power. After this war, there will be significant consequences even for Iran’s remaining influence in Iraq, which may become the final outpost lost by Tehran, ending a twenty-year effort (since the 2003 invasion of Iraq) to weave its intricate carpet of regional influence.

Mohammad Abu Rumman is the Academic Advisor of Politics and Society Institute in Amman and has contributed this article to The Jordan Times.

Continue reading
How Will Israel Stop The Houthi Missiles!

By Dr Marwan Asmar

Houthis missiles continue to rain down on Israel and that’s not an understatement. Only in this past month of May Israel was subject to 16 ballistic missiles. That’s almost one every two days. Sometimes two missiles were fired in one day.

On Thursday another ballistic missile was fired on Tel Aviv that stopped a football match for at least 10 minutes in a packed stadium of 30,000 people. Among the spectators, who were ordered to lie down, was Israeli president Isaac Herzog who was scurried to safety. 

The incoming missile for Ben Gurion Airport set sirens in over 300 major cities, towns, villages and settlements between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

In addition to that, and something that has become normal for Israelis since 7 October, 2023, 3 to 4 million hurried to underground shelters disrupting their lives and work processes.

This is not to say anything about the continuing psychological blows inflicted on them, and on a daily basis. This is the first time they have been subjected to what has become a set of nightmare occurrences first from Hezbollah and now the Houthi missiles travelling over 2000 kilometers north diagonally over the Red Sea to hit Israeli targets.

Thursday’s attack was in response to Wednesday’s Israeli bombing – the second time since 6 May – of the Sanaa International airport. Israeli bombs already destroyed the airport and the last attack made through 10 Israeli warplanes finished off the only aircraft left that belonged to the Yemeni airlines. The plane had just arrived in Sanaa from the Jordan capital of Amman.

And a day before that the Houthis had fired another missile on Tel Aviv. While most of the missiles are fired down by the Israeli forces before they reach their targets they have created tremendous confusion in the Israeli airwaves. Today tens of airlines have stopped flying to Tel Aviv despite the pleadings of the Israeli government that Israeli airports are safe. 

Since January 2025, 35 ballistic missiles have been launched on Israel from different locations in Yemen. Also, since early this year, 14 so-called attack drones were launched from Yemen to strike targets in Israel. 

As well, and only since March 29 missiles and 9 drones were fired from Yemen because Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu relaunched the war on Gaza on 19th March. Despite the Israeli precautions and ground batteries that shot down these missiles, they have created much debris on the ground when they came down to earth.

With the 16 ballistic missiles launched in May, four drones were also fired on different Israeli cities, statistics provided and confirmed by the Israeli army. It further states that  since 7 October 2023 the Houthis launched 70 missiles on Israeli sites, including ports, airports,  the Mossad headquarters in Tel Aviv and many more.

The Israeli army state these exclude the 330 drones that were fired on Israel over the past 19 months of the Israel genocide on Gaza taking the number of Palestinian deaths to 54,321 with the number of injuries at 123,770.

As a result, the Houthis succeeded in imposing an air embargo on Israel in May as their leadership insists. Their projectiles have stopped 10s of international airlines from flying to the Ben Gurion Airport with British Airways and the low-cost Ryanair being the latest to suspend flights.

These are the latest to follow the Lufthansa group which include SWISS, Austrian Airlines, Brussels Airlines and Eurowings. They have already stopped going to Tel Aviv and are watching the situation carefully before they take the step of resetablishing air connections.

Since 4 May other planes that suspended flights to Israel include  Latvian airline, AirBaltic, easyJet, United Airlines, Iberia and Transavia.

However, among the few foreign airlines that recently resumed flight services to Israel are Air France, Delta, Wizz Air, Ethiopian Airlines, Etihad Airways and Greece’s Aegean Airlines states The Times of Israel.

Unprecedented

The Thursday ballistic missile was unprecedented because the Israeli president was watching. The match had to stop while he was rushed away to safety. The Israeli media says the match was stopped twice when the missiles were launched from Yemen and when tens of thousands of people were told to lie on the ground for 20 minutes and a second time when spectators booed Herzog.

The Houthi leadership already warned the Israelis to do “what it will” because it will not stop firing the ballistic missiles on Israel until the latter stops its war on Gaza.

They say that Israel can bomb Yemen as much as it wants but it will not stop the missiles on Tel Aviv and different areas like Eilat.  Despite putting on a strong face Israel is in a quandary. About 30 Israeli warplanes took part in destroying the Sanaa Airport on 5 May but the Yemenis have not flinched.

Now, the Israeli Minister Israel Katz is in a vehement mood and is warning that Israel will continue to bomb and re-bomb existing sites till the end if need be. Truth be told however, the Israelis are bombing indiscriminately as they don’t know and figure out where the Houthis missiles are being fired from in Yemen.

Netanyahu is convinced that Iran is supplying the Houthis with the missiles and that’s why he wants to hit the country but the problem with that is the Trump administration at present is  talking to Tehran about reaching an agreement on its nuclear file and is sending direct messages to Netanyahu to lay off that country and not attempt any foolish act like striking its nuclear facilities.

Thus only time will tell how international relations will unravel especially since Trump reached a deal with the Houthis at the beginning of May that they would stop bombing them if they desist from attacking American ships and planes. The previous months or so the US waged a military campaign on the Houthis that led to nowhere but a costly war of $1 billion.

With the US out of the way, it can be said the Houthis are having a field day on continuing their strikes on Israel. Their message is simple: Stop bombing Gaza and we will stop striking Israel.

Continue reading
Why Doesn’t Trump Want Netanyahu to Strike Iran?

By Dr Marwan Asmar

CROSSFIREARABIA – United States president Donald Trump seems to be a very happy man these days. He says he is about to reach a deal with Iran on its nuclear file very soon.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the other hand is particularly worried, concerned, frustrated and even downhearted. He says ‘we need to strike Iran now before it’s too late and it goes ahead and develops a nuclear bomb’. 

But, and on the contrary, Trump believes that it’s because Iran is still at a weak stage before reaching nuclear  weapons capability, the US can force a deal that would make sure it checks its nuclear arsenal and would submit to the American will.

To prove his point, Trump through his US negotiating team led by Steve Witkoff, is continually talking to the Iranian team through Oman, now in their fifth mediating session about ironing out a new deal that would satisfy the US point of view and give the Iranians peace of mind and something to look forward to like lifting sanctions on the country.

To that extent, and no doubt for public relations, Trump is never short these days on complementing the Iranians with his glowing uttrances on the country and how it can become “great” again.

By their own accord however, both teams who are talking indirectly through the Omanis, say that negotiations is tough and may even going through a rough patch.

The Iranian delegates are sticking to their position, they want a deal but not at any price. They want to continue to pursue their uranium enrichment program believing this is a question of state and national sovereignty. They say they haven’t reached such a local, indegenous breakthrough in order to give it, whilst praising their scentific and technological advancements in this area of power.

The Americans on the other hand insist that Iranian divest itself from this nuclear process for uranium enrichment is a ‘redline’ as it leads to the possession of a nuclear weapon. To the Trump administration, this point is intractable which Iran has to give up on. 

But if this is the case why is the US continuing to talk to Iran? Further still, why should Trump be happy and talk about an impending deal that would lock the hands of the Iranians? Clearly, the American president is happy despite the murky regional waters.

Back to Israel. Netanyahu is deeply worried and wants to frustrate any impending nuclear deal. But he was always frustrated about Iran and argued, well, at least for the last 10 years, against talking to Iran and placating it. It was argued he was the person to convince Trump to leave the international JCPA treaty signed between the five-members of the UN Security Council and Iran in 2018.

Today however, and for Netanyahu, its “horrors” on the horizons. Leaked newspaper reports in The New York Times suggest there is deep tension between Trump and Netanyahu on this issue for the US president doesn’t want the later to embark on any action such as military strikes that would jeopardize any upcoming deal.

That is why Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer and Mossad Chief David Barnea are being invited to Washington to the White House to impress upon them not to embark on a drastic Israeli action and bomb Iranian military and nuclear sites whilst negotiations are going on.

Many US and European experts however are fearful that Netanyahu wouldn’t be able to be controlled and if he embarks on striking Iran he would do so without consulting the Americans and go it alone and in spite of the ‘talked-about” pressure that is being exercised by the White House on Tel Aviv.

Regardless however, Trump wants a deal come what may for he believes this would be a great achievement for America and would vindicate his earlier action when he got the US out of the deal in 2018 and now in return for a better accord, and moving his own view to create a safer world and enforce his image that he is a man of peace and doesn’t support world wars like his recent attempt to stop the Ukraine War.

If Israel does strike Iran, in theory that would make Trump very unhappy because it would mean the United States is no longer able to control its strategic ally, or it could mean that behind the international and regional diplomatic chit-chat, the US is not too bothered about striking Iran.

But there are also other problems to consider: Wouldn’t a strike on Iran, especially on its nuclear sites, produce a spiral and a slippery-slope in which the latter would surely retaliate and be capable of doing so, with vehement force.

Apart from what that would do to the region, ie, “nuclear catastrophe”, would Netanyahu go along that road and risk annihilation for Israel and its surrounding areas.

These are tough questions to consider and may force Netanyahu to back down and listen to the US.

Continue reading