Israeli jets carried out a series of preemptive strikes against Iranian targets, early Friday morning. This represents the most serious peak in the growing tensions across the Middle East. This unilateral military action has raised troubling questions. It calls into question the success of former President Donald Trump’s attempt to cease and desist Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s go hard or go home policies toward Iran.
Only hours after Trump asked Netanyahu to refrain from military action against Iran, the strikes began. This episode illustrates the fragility of US-Israel relations, particularly as the Biden administration is embroiled in extended diplomacy with Tehran. Israeli officials communicated to the United States that they deemed this action necessary for self-defense, indicating a shift away from coordinated military strategy between the two nations.
According to these reports, Netanyahu would have agreed to a short ceasefire or for an immediate cessation of the strikes. An explicit warning from the Trump administration would have surely tipped the balance. A broadcaster affiliated with Netanyahu’s government stated that the strikes were fully coordinated with Washington, yet this assertion clashes with the US government’s rapid distancing from Israel’s decision to target Iran.
Marco Rubio, “This is a bad unilateral action against Iran. In his remarks, he reiterated his personal conviction that the strikes were done independent of US orders. Rubio doubled-down on the fact that the US’s continued priority is indeed defending American forces present in the area.
“Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defence,” – Marco Rubio
The timing of the strikes is only further alarming when considering the state of negotiations between the US and Iran. Trump had been concerned, once before, that an Israeli offensive would endanger sensitive negotiations that were destined to produce a nuclear accord.
“We are fairly close to a pretty good agreement … I’d much prefer an agreement. As long as I think there is an agreement I don’t want them going in because I think that would blow it,” – Donald Trump
Foes of the administration’s policies charge that the US has washed its hands of the Middle East. They argue that this withdrawal increases the likelihood of escalation and conflict between Israel and Iran. By policy expert William Wechsler’s account, this represented an alarming disconnect in US policy. The real issue, he stressed, is the uncertainty that looms over the US’s position on Israel’s conduct.
“There’s clearly some confusion in the US position right now … and some differences between the United States position and Israel’s position,” – William Wechsler
In the wake of the attacks, the US administration doubled down on its goal of pivoting to making American personnel across the region safe. Rubio stuck to this position, arguing that Iran must not be allowed to do anything that threatens US interests or people.
“Let me be clear: Iran should not target US interests or personnel,” – Marco Rubio
As tensions mount, Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, is scheduled to travel to Muscat, Oman, for a sixth round of talks with Iranian officials this Sunday. The result of these discussions is anyone’s guess, and even more so under the shadow of the recent escalation of Israel’s military actions.
Since last week’s Israeli strikes on Iran, that spotlight has turned a laser beam focus on Trump’s capacity to control relations in the area. The unfortunate reality is that the balance between a military response and a necessary counter-terrorism diplomacy that moves toward stabilizing Middle Eastern politics is nearly impossible to express.