Israel–United States: A Strategic Alliance Under Strain, but Not at Breaking Point

The report first sets out what is at stake. The relationship between the two countries largely shapes the geopolitics of the Near and Middle East, with global repercussions. The most recent of these is the war in Iran and its impact on energy costs.

The report emphasizes that the Trump-"Bibi" tandem deliberately puts itself on show. In July 2025, the Israeli prime minister presented Donald Trump with the letter he had sent to the Nobel Committee. Trump returned the favor in October 2025: at the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, he called on the Israeli president to pardon Benjamin Netanyahu.

Beyond this staging, the alliance is presented as historically very strong and is often described as unbreakable. Since the United States recognized the State of Israel in 1948, the two countries have built ties of strategic interdependence on the geopolitical, diplomatic, economic and military fronts. The report puts forward a figure: between 2019 and 2023, nearly 70% of the weapons imported by Israel came from the United States. Washington, for its part, relies on Israel to project its power in the Near East.

Yet this relationship has never been free of disagreements. One commentator describes it as a relationship with "a lot of ups and downs." According to her, it is not always linear and depends on the international context as well as on who the leaders in power are.

Tensions have surfaced in the past. According to the report, what is new is that this time they come with a profound societal shift. Between the two leaders, the atmosphere has soured. In June 2026, the outlet Axios reported that Donald Trump had allegedly called his counterpart "completely crazy." At their last meeting, in July 2026, the two men wore strained smiles.

One commentator observes that Netanyahu no longer frames his relationship with Trump the same way he did six months or a year ago, and that the feeling is mutual. In his view, showing that they get along is no longer as politically rewarding as it used to be.

The reason given lies in the evolution of American public opinion. Some officials are denouncing Israel's response in Gaza following Hamas's terrorist attacks of October 7, 2023. The report states that Israeli military officials have acknowledged that more than 70,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since those attacks.

According to the report, these criticisms come with a fundamental change. Before 2024, Republicans and Democrats alike were mostly supportive of Israel, but the trend has since reversed. Both camps are now divided on the issue. Influencers known for controversial remarks, Tucker Carlson on the right and Hasan Piker on the left, are deepening these divides.

On the Israeli side, support for the United States is traditionally strong, but the trend is changing there too. Israel's level of dependence on Washington is raising more and more questions. The report cites an Israel Democracy Institute poll published in November 2025: the majority of respondents believe that the United States carries more weight in Israel's security decisions than the Israeli government itself.

One commentator explains that Israelis are revising their perception of Donald Trump, even though he is considered the most pro-Israel president of all time. He cites around 79% of Israelis who do not trust Trump to handle relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran and the ongoing war. According to him, these Israelis believe this war is plunging their country into uncertainty.

The report describes Trump and Netanyahu as engaged in a balancing act. They must preserve a relationship that is indispensable to them without alienating their voters. The relationship is indeed making its way into domestic debates. In the United States, foreign financial aid, particularly to Israel, is ruffling feathers, as is the continuation of the war in Iran. The Israel question has thus become an electoral issue in its own right.

One commentator stresses another factor: the rise of antisemitism in the United States. According to her, this phenomenon changes a great deal for the Jewish community, particularly politically. She finds the situation interesting in an election year, because voters who did not necessarily vote based on Israel now do.

On the Israeli side, security remains the top concern. Despite disagreements over Iran, American support remains fundamental for the Jewish state, and the outcome of the midterm elections could directly affect it. One commentator believes that if the Democrats make gains, they will be able to block more aid to Israel, more munitions deliveries or other equipment.

According to him, Israelis would then have to both lobby and cope with an America that would send less than before. He adds that the strategic relationship would remain fairly similar, particularly for joint arms production. The report concludes that, depending on the outcome of the legislative elections, the intensity of exchanges could decline somewhat without calling the relationship into question.

One commentator sums up the central argument. According to him, the needs on both sides in terms of security, defense, intelligence and diplomacy are so structural that they go beyond the personalities of the leaders. The two countries therefore cannot afford a rupture.

The report concludes that the current disagreements do not amount to a tipping point. Public opinion is increasingly divided and relations between leaders are sometimes stormy, but the two states remain, according to the report, too strategically interdependent to give up their alliance.