For Israel, Trump's Victory Is a Pyrrhic Victory

Prof. Amnon Cavari, Head of the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility at Reichman University

For many Israelis, the U.S. elections are seen as a victory that offers hope. During the campaign, many Israelis supported Trump, believing he was more pro-Israel than Kamala Harris and that his election would strengthen Israel's security. This was despite the unprecedented support Israel received from the Biden administration over the past year and President Biden's clear commitment to Israel's security. A survey conducted by the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility at Reichman University after the U.S. elections shows that Israelis believe Trump would protect Israel and restrain its enemies. However, Trump's victory may not only be harmful to Israel in the short term but could prove to be a Pyrrhic victory, damaging long-term U.S. support for Israel because of the issue has become entangled in internal American political struggles.

After the Hamas attack on October 7, Israelis were astonished by the strength of U.S. President Joe Biden's support for Israel. Biden's visit to Israel just days after the attack, his warm embrace of Israelis, his clear rhetoric supporting Israel while condemning Hamas's actions, and the unprecedented U.S. military aid to Israel garnered public admiration for the president across most of Israel's political spectrum. Surveys from Reichman University showed that, compared to May 2023, Israeli support for the president surged to 70% after the attack, with minimal differences between voters for coalition and opposition parties. However, this golden age of support for Biden among Israelis faded quickly. By February 2024, when disagreements arose between the President and the Israeli government over increased aid to Gaza residents and limiting the use of force, support for Biden dropped back to 55%, with a more significant decline among coalition voters.

While Biden was viewed critically, Israelis had even less trust in his vice president, Kamala Harris. In October 2024, a month before the elections, a survey conducted by the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility at Reichman University showed that Israelis overwhelmingly preferred Trump over Harris, believing he was far more committed to Israel's security than Harris and that Trump genuinely supported of the country. Although support for Trump was stronger among coalition voters, opposition voters also leaned toward Trump. Israelis perceived him as better for Israel, more committed, and more likely to act in its favor. This perspective set Israelis apart from most countries. A global survey by Gallup International across 44 countries showed that Harris received 54% support compared to Trump's 26%, with Trump's strongest backing coming from Russia, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Hungary.

Now, following Trump's victory, the Israeli public and its elected officials express joy and relief. A survey conducted by the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility among 807 Israelis, representing a cross-section of Israeli society, about a week after the elections (November 11–14), examined the significance of Trump's victory for Israelis. The survey found that 57% of Israelis expressed a favorable view of Trump, with most support coming from coalition voters but also notable among opposition voters (45% favorable versus 37% unfavorable). Additionally, 65% of Israelis believe Trump's election is good for Israel—91% of coalition voters and 53% of opposition voters agreed. Furthermore, 61% of the public think that Trump's victory will improve Israel's security—87% among coalition voters and 50% among opposition voters.

Israelis also believe Trump's victory could advance key Israeli interests. Although many Israelis were unsure of how Trump's election would affect hostage negotiations or the conflict with Iran, among those expressing an opinion (about two-thirds of respondents), a significant majority (63%) believed his election would promote hostage negotiations, and 72% thought Trump would restrain Iran. Public officials expressed similar sentiments—from prayers for Trump's well-being during a Knesset Constitution Committee session to ministerial declarations calling for settlement of Gaza and annexation of territories following his election. The composition of Trump's cabinet and advisory circle, featuring pro-Israel figures in key positions such as Secretary of State, Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and U.S. Ambassador to Israel, further strengthens Israelis' confidence in the incoming administration's support.

Nonetheless, the robust American support for Israel over the past year has gone far beyond rhetoric, encompassing a complex policy framework reflecting a deep U.S. commitment to Israel's well-being—through diplomatic pressure, the deployment of American troops in the region, and the creation of impressive defense coalitions. It remains unclear whether Trump and his administration will have the capability or willingness to sustain such measures or create new ones in the future. The actions of the first Trump administration show that Trump views the Middle East from a transactional perspective, believing in the possibility of imposing a simplistic agreement on the parties involved, which they might not be able to accept. Previous presidents who invested heavily in resolving Middle Eastern conflicts often became disillusioned and blamed Israeli leadership for the failure. Historical experience suggests that Trump, at the very least, is equally prone to shifting blame onto others.

The continuation of the war, a lack of resolution in the south and north military fronts, and increasing radicalization within Israeli society might push the Trump administration to propose a "brilliant" solution from its perspective (similar to the "Deal of the Century"). If this fails to gain agreement, the administration could entirely withdraw from involvement in the Middle East leaving Israel alone to fight off a war that even a majority of Israelis (58%) believe that its government is not able to handle the country’s security challenges, and an even greater majority (67%) believe that Israel is dependent on other countries to achieve victory in this war (based on a survey conducted in September 2024 by the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility).

Moreover, the enthusiasm of Israeli leadership and its overt support for Trump and his administration are detrimental to Israel's security. In an irresponsible move led by Prime Minister Netanyahu for over a decade, Israel has openly aligned itself with the Republican Party. While this approach might offer temporary advantages, as current government officials and much of the public believe, it significantly harms Israel's long-term interests. U.S. surveys over the past decade show a consistent decline in American public support for Israel and growing political polarization regarding U.S. attitudes toward Israel.

Whereas in the past, support for Israel transcended party and social divides, today, support is primarily concentrated among older cohorts (Baby Boomers) and a more broad generational coalition of Republicans (not including the younger generations). Generational changes and political shifts could soon result in the election of a president and a congressional majority whose support for Israel is limited, conditional, and lacks the deep-rooted affinity exhibited by President Biden (and other Democrats). Unlike Biden, Trump harbors no intrinsic affection for Israel but sees it as part of a broader set of interests that currently position Israel as an important player. Should these interests change, or should Israel present a challenge to US interests (as Trumps sees them), Israel could find itself isolated, lacking U.S. government support and allies in Congress. A future inevitable Democratic administration would pose a diplomatic challenge that Israel may struggle to overcome, leaving it dependent on congressional members who owe their elections to constituents who are skeptical of Israel's importance as a U.S. ally and view it as an aggressive state violating human rights. For Israel, which has long benefited from bipartisan support regardless of the election winner, this could prove to be a long lasting tragedy.