Trump’s deals with Iran are not a betrayal of Israel

Supporters of Israel have been dismayed by some of the recent actions and statements of the Trump administration with regard to a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran. As one friend from Israel recently told me, “Our best friend is hurting us.” This represents a fear that an agreement with Iran could leave Israel facing existential risks at the end of three years of war. Yet there are three important facts to remember about the context for current developments. 

The first is the reason for US President Donald Trump’s actions. Trump is facing midterm elections in November, at the halfway point of his second term. The opposition typically picks up seats in such elections and that could mean Democrats take control of one, or both, houses of Congress. Democrats have become extreme in their ideology and tactics, and would certainly impeach Trump and try to cut the war short. They will also try to cut off aid to Israel, or even join international boycotts. 

In other words, the midterm elections are themselves a battlefield in the war. To spare the war effort, and himself, Trump has to avoid a commitment of US ground forces and make compromises that bring down the oil price and reduce inflationary pressures. He will respond to Iran if the regime pushes its luck ‒ as it is now doing ‒ but if he presses too far, he could cripple himself politically, which would be good for Iran and bad for both the US and Israel. 

Second, the US will ultimately win this war, because it has to do so. As the country celebrates its 250th anniversary, it is worth noting that the reason it became a great naval power and developed a strong expeditionary force – the Marines – centuries ago was to fight Islamic regimes that greeted American independence from Britain (and British protection) by seizing American ships, enslaving American sailors, and demanding tribute from the American government. 

The Barbary Wars, as they were called, took place in two phases. At the end of the first, the US fought some successful battles but had to accept a compromise that didn’t resolve the issue and that left some tribute in place. In the second war, the US was far stronger and was able to end the threat. It didn’t accept that some remote Islamic power would be able to threaten the freedom of the seas, and it won’t accept that now, even if there is a pause. 

Third, the Trump administration has already delivered several victories that have benefited Israel and placed it in a uniquely advantageous position. The US destroyed much of the Iranian military. It supported Israel in its destruction of the Iranian leadership. And it has brokered a crucial agreement between Israel and Lebanon that will allow the Israeli military to maintain a security presence in southern Lebanon as it clears out remnants of Iranian-backed Hezbollah. 

The latter agreement appeared to be in jeopardy when the Iranians tried to link the MOU with Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, and the Trump administration suggested that Israel might need to compromise on Lebanon to preserve the overall deal. Over several days, it became clear that Israel would never withdraw from Lebanon while Hezbollah remained; that this was an existential question and it would defy any MOU between the US and Iran on this point. 

Put another way, the administration floated Israeli withdrawal as a trial balloon, and received a firm answer, not just from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu but also from the Israeli opposition. They, in turn, were conveying the will of the Israeli people, who have sacrificed their lives for nearly three years. This wasn’t diplomatic posturing by Israel; it was a statement of fact that leaving Iran’s proxy in place meant ceding northern Israel, which Israelis would keep giving their lives to prevent. 

There is another reason that supporters of Israel worry about the Trump administration’s stance, and that is the fact that Trump and especially Vice-President JD Vance, who hopes to succeed him, have been vocally critical of Israel. Trump has earned enough trust that his criticisms are taken in stride. But Vance, who has otherwise been supportive of Israel, appears to have taken some gratuitous swipes at Israel to appease the online antisemitic fringe. 

That is happening as Democrats are electing rabid anti-Israel, and anti-American, socialists. In one case, congressman Dan Goldman lost a primary race to socialist Brad Lander. Both are Jews, but Lander has taken a virulently anti-Israel line. Goldman is only a tepid supporter of Israel, but that was enough. Not even his leading role in impeaching Trump could save him. The campaign was notable for antisemitism against Goldman by Lander’s socialist allies. 

So the concern is understandable. But the war will end in victory, even if Trump must back away for now, for domestic political reasons. Moreover, the success of the Trump-Netanyahu partnership will endure long after their respective administrations. Supporters of Israel should remain vigilant, but should be diplomatic in their criticism. That was the valid part of Vance’s point, beneath his unpleasant language: don’t make this harder for Trump than it already is. 

• South African-born Joel Pollak is the senior editor-at-large and in-house counsel at Breitbart News and hosts Breitbart News Sunday. He was once the speech writer for then leader of the Democratic Alliance Tony Leon, and has a Master of Arts in Jewish Studies. Pollak has written several books, including How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, and The Agenda: What Trump Should Do in His First 100 Days.