Old Cleavage Are Dying: How Surveillance Technology Is Creating a Powerful Israeli-Arab-US Alliance

A new and powerful alliance has emerged in the Middle East. At its core is Israel, working closely with the United States, and a group of wealthy Arab partners, namely Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf states. It reflects fear of a nuclear Iran and its efforts to control the MENA region. A key factor in the alliance's growth is the development of surveillance and military use technology. The corporations benefitting from this alliance have fostered political repression while enjoying high profit margins through the technologies they sell.

 

In the award winning film NAZA, 24 Israeli intelligence officers describe how the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) has conducted its war in Gaza. One reason there were so many civilian causalities was the use of sophisticated technologies to surveil HAMAS operatives using their cell phones. The intelligence officers note that the most effective way to kill them was to bomb their homes at night while they were sleeping next to their phones and with their families. Bombing HAMAS members' homes led to extensive collateral damage in civilian deaths, hence the film's title NAZA (nezek agavi - Hebrew for collateral damage).

NAZA underscores the increasing use of "technologies of death" in the conduct of war. Israel is one of the world's leaders in new forms of surveillance and cyber security technology. How will this technology impact other nation-states which purchase it? In particular, how will Israel's sales of such technology to Arab countries, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), affect the traditional Arab Israeli cleavage? Will it lead to more repressive authoritarian rule in a region which is already entirely devoid of democratic governance?

A major concern raised by this technology is the spread of what Shoshana Zuboff calls "surveillance capitalism." This form of capitalism began with the commodification of personal data under the impact of the digital revolution. Surveillance technology in the wrong hands threatens our privacy, freedoms and personal safety. Unfortunately, for the companies which produce and sell it, profits motive override any concerns for human well being.

More recently, surveillance technology has morphed into a mode of controlling human behavior.  Thus, the use of surveillance can be put to good uses to fight crime and terrorism, and protect critical infrastructure. To date, however, it has more often than not been used for malevolent purposes.

In the Gaza War, the IDF has deployed its intelligence officers to locate and target HAMAS operatives in their homes. This was the most effective way to eliminate them. However, it resulted in the deaths of many innocent civilians, including large numbers of women and children. That massive civilian deaths, euphemistically refereed to as "collateral damage" rather than human beings, underscores the dehumanization of surveillance technology when used for policing and military purposes. We are Google and Amazon workers. We condemn Project Nimbus

The development of surveillance technology and cyber intelligence firms has become a key growth sector in the Israeli economy. This sector developed in the early 2000s after the Second Intifada and September 11th attacks. A driving force behind the growth of these firms was a IDF unit known as 8200 (The  Intelligence Pipeline). Many IDF members who served in Unit 8200 subsequently went into the private sector after leaving military service to either create or join private sector firms focused on surveillance and cyber security technology.

With growing international demand for surveillance and cyber security technology, newly established Israeli firms found a willing global market. One of the first firms to rise to prominence was the NSO Group. Founded in 2011, it developed the Pegasus software which can be surreptitiously loaded into an individual cell phone (via the "zero-click" function) and then follow and record the owner's every move and access all of her/his personal data. Israel and Google cooperate on Project Nimbus  Google Worried It Couldn’t Control How Israel Uses Project Nimbus, Files Reveal

When first marketed, NSO stated that Pegasus was designed to combat crime and terrorism.  However, it soon became evident that it was being used to surveil journalists, human rights activists, local dissidents, and NGOs. A number studies, including Amnesty International's Project Pegasus, documented the human rights abuses Pegasus had facilitated in a number of countries by authoritarian regimes around the world. Amnesty International: Case Study - The Pegasus Project

Pegasus spyware has been central to the Netanyahu regime's foreign policy. With the signing of the Abraham Accords in 2019,  the Israeli prime minister made sure each Arab country received the new technology. Pegasus was also linked to the killing of Washington Post correspondent and Saudi dissident, Jamal Khashoggi. Before and after his gruesome murder and dismemberment in Saudi Arabia's Istanbul Consulate, members of his family were targeted by Pegasus both before and after his assassination. The Pegasus Project Where Netanyahu Went, NSO Followed: How Israel Pushed Cyberweapon Sales

NSO and other surveillance technology firms have benefitted from contacts with US firms. Amazon and Google were part of the highly controversial Project Nimbus. This $1.2 billion project which was signed 2021 provided cloud services for the Israeli military and government. However, the contract lacked all the normal provisions for controlling the proper and lawful use of the cloud services. Google's own lawyers objected to the ability of Netanyahu's government's ability to use the technology in any way they saw fit. We are Google and Amazon workers. We Condemn Project Nimbus

The Pegasus technology has allowed for further surveillance of and unlawful data collection on Palestinians, and facilitates expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land.  It has also been used for repressive purposes in many states, some of which are highly autocratic.  These states include Uganda, Azerbaijan ,Hungary (under ex-prime minister Viktor Orban),  Mexico, Morocco, India, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kazakhstan, Bahrayn and Poland. Spyware may be targeting some 1,000 journalists, dissidents and human rights activists worldwide, probe shows

American spyware and surveillance firms have developed close ties to Israel. Palantir Technologies, the cyber security firm whose products and sales have provoked International controversy, maintains a strategic relationship with the Israeli Ministry of Defense. Both Alex Karp, the CEO, who is a strong supporter of the Netanyahu regime, and Peter Thiel, co-founder and Board of Directors chair, have visited Israel  where they concluded a contract with the Ministry of Defense.  to supply it with their Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP) which improves targeting and miltary decision-making. Palantir Joins Forces With Israeli Defense Ministry In War Tech Partnership: Report

Palantir's Middle East exposure is by no means limited to Israel. According to its own reports, it supplies a vast array of defense, A.I. products and spyware to Arab Gulf states. While, according to its blog, Palantir is. not a surveillance company, meaning it does not conduct surveillance itself, it has worked with Dubai Holdings launched Aither, a joint venture with the Dubai government's investment arm, to promote AI and data-integration transformation in the UAE's public and private sectors. Ostensibly for civilian use, the software platform's data aggregation ability can also be used to monitor and repress citizen dissent. About Palantir: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Palantir

More recently, Israel's surveillance and cyber security industry's relations have been closer to home. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have developed closer security ties to Israel. This development contravenes Saudi Arabia's 2002 Arab Peace Initiative (API) which precludes ties with Israel until a n independent Palestinian state is created. Time for Saudi Clarity on Normalization with Israel

However, Saudi interaction with Israel has been extensive for many years. After the Saudi monarchy found itself under weapons sanctions as a result of Jamal Khashoggi's murder, Benjamin Netanyahu contacted the Trump administration to lobby on behalf of Muhammad Bin Salman, who was facing severe international condemnation for ordering Khashoggi's murder. Netanyahu tried to help to lift any sanctions on Bin Salman's regime in an effort to develop closer ties with the Saudi monarchy. Netanyahu Tells Trump To Back Saudi Prince After Brutal Khashoggi Murder

Authoritarian Arab states face restive, disgruntled populations, especially among youth. Their increasing dependence on surveillance technology and spyware to monitor and control challenges to their rule has created a strong market for Israel and American corporations. which sell these products. Quadream, a now defunct Israeli company, sold spyware to UAE and Saudi Arabia among many other countries. A secretive firm, its products were similar to the NSO Group. Working in Cyprus allowed Quadream to circumvent oversight by the Israeli Ministry of Defense. Surveillance technology firm Quadream reportedly selling intrusive tools to Saudi Arabia, raising human rights concerns

Integrity Lab (formerly Candiru) is an Israeli spyware and cyber arms company founded in 2014. The company has developed malware which allows infiltrating mobile telephones computers and other digital devices. It has exploited advertising platforms to identify possible targets and use information gathered to infiltrate their digital devices. based on its activities, Integrity Lab (then known as Candiru) was placed under International sanctions by the United States. Researchers Uncover Signs of Massive Surveillance Operation on Starlink Users

The political implications What the new alliance of the Israel the United States and Saudi Arabia and the Arab states underscores is that the old cleavages of Israel vs. Arab, Arab nationalism vs. Zionism and Muslim vs. Jew have largely lost their meaning.  Once powerful ideologies such as Arab nationalism, secualkr Zionism and radical Islamism have lost thei luster. 

Devoid of ideologies and ruling largely through brute force, technologies which allow authoritarian regimes find surveillance technologies highly attractive. It allows the region's dictators surveil and arrest any citizen who appears to threaten the existing order. Surveillance technologies have become the new modus operandi of repression. China usually comes to mind when we think of surveillance. But the Middle East may soon be in a position to challenge China's first place in this infamous form of rule. 

It Only Gets Worse: How Trump and Netanyahu's Iran War has Metastasized into a Global Catastrophe

Burial site of the 100+ students and teachers killed by US bombing
at Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School at Minab, February 28, 2026 

As the United States nears the end of two years of his presidency, the damage Donald Trump has inflicted on the United States and its international standing is staggering.  In foreign policy, nowhere is Trump's damage greater than in the Middle East.  The attack Trump launched with Israel on Iran in February 2026 has not only had a significant impact on the MENA region but on areas far from Iran and the Persian /Arab Gulf. Why has Trump been so ineffective in his foreign policy and what is the extent of the damage he has caused thus far?

The key reason which explains Trump's foreign policy failures is his lack of leadership.  Trump has no vision of the United States' future.  Instead, he follows an ad hoc approach whereby foreign policy is concocted in haste and with little forethought.  Experts who could make important contributions to key foreign policy decisions are ignored 

More often than not, Trump's narcissism has played a central role in his decision-making. Entering the presidential race in 2016, Trump was more interested in using the publicity of his campaign to boost his flagging business empire than necessarily winning the presidency. In other words, Trump entered politics to garner media attention and earn money.

Narcissism is dangerous when it defines a political leader's personality, especially one who rules the most powerful country in the world.  The narcissist as political leader sees the world though his own mirror and believes that only he understands what decisions should be made. It also opens the leader to being influenced by obsequious advisors and foreign leaders who know how to manipulate him through excessive praise.

If a move in the international region increases his global visibility, Trump is invariably drawn to the issue at hand. Alternatively, if a foreign policy decision is linked to a specific authoritarian leader who he admires, especially Vladimir Putin, then its outcome will be influenced by whether it pleases or displeases the dictator in question. 

There was no civic impetus for Trump's entry into politics in 2016. That lack of civic consciousness persists in Trump 2.0. Foreign policy is not viewed in a global context that seeks to promote American strength, national interests or global stability, let alone democratic governance.  Instead, Trump's foreign policy decisions are a set of discrete acts which are viewed in a limited timeframe and narrow transactional terms. 

What's in the outcome of a foreign policy decision for the United States is invariably defined by how it enhances Trump's influence and financial standing, e.g., transforming a scorched earth Gaza into a Mediterranean tourist attraction for the well heeled (with the Trump Family business playing a key reconstruction role). While Trump argues that each decision he makes strengthens the United States' position in the world, his record demonstrates the opposite, namely that his policies, domestically and internationally, have seriously weakened the United States.  

Leaving highly complex negotiations to his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and real estate business partner, Steve Witkoff, while ignoring diplomats with regional expertise, and removing many of them from the Department of State and other government agencies concerned with foreign affairs, Trump has undermined American influence in the Middle East.  

The Roots of the Iran War Much has been written about the Iran War (see my: Will the United States and Israel Achieve Victory or Will the Iran Conflict Become Another "Forever War"? ) As Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman's incisive New York Times article which chronicled the meeting where the Iran attack was decided has shown, Trump refused to engage in a discussion of the possibility that the Tehran regime would respond by closing the Strait of Hormuz. How Trump Took the U.S. to War With Iran

Nor did Trump heed the advice of Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf states that an attack on Iran would be an egregious mistake. Their assessment was correct as Iran's response to the US and Israeli attacks was to bomb American bases in the Gulf as well as financial and tourist targets, thoroughly disrupting the Gulf region. Further, Trump never considered including the United States' NATO allies in the discussions about launching the war against Iran.

Seduced by Benjamin Netanyahu's playing up to his narcissistic personality, Trump saw the attack on Iran as "solving" a problem which has bedeviled American presidents since the so-called Islamic Republic came to power in 1979. Netanyahu played to Trump's legacy desires by promising him that a joint American-Israeli attack would only require a short amount of time to achieve its objectives. What made this scenario particularly attractive was that no American ground forces would be needed.

Assured by his advisors (Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, excepted) that the Tehran regime would quickly collapse after intensive US and Israeli bombing, much as Venezuela quickly became an American protectorate after Nicholas Maduro was removed from power, Trump marched ahead. Trump felt certain that once the Islamic Republic collapsed, especially after Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei and a large part of Iran's military leadership was killed on the morning of February 28th, the new regime would soon come to terms on ending Iran's nuclear weapons program. 

The Iran War's Impact on the Gulf  Neither Trump, Netanyahu nor the US military realized the degree to which Iran would be able to use asymmetric warfare to stymy the joint US-Israeli attack. Nor did they realize that Iran would attack Saudi Arabia and the US' allies in the Arab Gulf.  Unlike Trump, the Tehran regime has developed a  decentralized ("mosaic") strategy for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the armed forces and police which gives local commanders throughout the country operational autonomy to fight any external attack.

The result of the US-Israeli attack on Iran was to seriously damage those Gulf states which have defense ties with the US and American military bases. An Iranian drone attack on Bahrayn largely destroyed the local US air base. In the process, it disrupted the US' supply chain to its carrier fleet in the Arabian Sea off the Strait of Hormuz. (the reason why the US aircraft carrier, the Lincoln, experienced extensive logistical problems while on duty off Iran). A drone attack on Qatar set back its production of natural gas exports by 3-5 years while the UAE saw its foreign investment bubble burst by similar attacks which targeted hotels and tourist sites. Kuwait was particularly hard hit.

In sum, the production of oil and natural gas, and fertilizer in the Gulf, upon which much of the world depends, was halted. The idea of Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf as "islands of tranquility" in an otherwise unstable Middle East was shattered. Expatriate capital flight form the Arab Gulf was the result.   

While some oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz at the time of this writing, insurance costs and the reluctance of many tankers to enter the Gulf continue keep global price of oil and diesel fuel well above that of the day before the joint United States-Israeli attack on Iran. Gulf States Struggle to Recover Economically After 6 Months of War

The spread of the Iran War After the Iran War began, it didn't take long for Tehran to mobilize its proxies. The first to act was Hizballah which launched rockets into northern Israel. Israel's response was to invade southern Lebanon, bomb what it claimed were Hizballah targets in Beirut and demolish villages populated by Shi'a Lebanese (assumed to support Hizballah) along the Israel-Lebanon border and then further to the north. Israeli forces have likewise occupied Syrian territory neighboring Lebanon. Civilian casualties have mounted as fighting in southern Lebanon has continued.

Because Trump is mired down in the Iran War, the November mid-term elections, and fighting efforts to slow down A.I. development in the United States, not to speak of his vanity projects, he has paid little attention to the Middle East apart from trying to force Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz. Thus, the Iran War also enabled the Netanyahu regime to continue to occupy a large section of Gaza (70%) and bomb local targets there at will, claiming they were HAMAS operatives without eliciting any reaction from the White House. As in Lebanon, civilian causalities in Gaza continue to mount.

While they took some time to react to the US-Israel attack on Iran, the Houthis, Tehran's Yemeni proxies, announced they would ban Saudi ships from transiting the Bab la-Mandab, which is the narrow strait at the opening of the Red Sea. With the Strait of Hormuz closed, Saudi Arabia had been diverting oil shipments through Petroline, its 746 mile pipeline across the Arabian desert to the Red Sea port city of Yanbu. Once oil was loaded onto tankers at Yanbu, they would proceed south through the Bab al-Mandab on their way to Asian markets.  

Now that southern Red Sea route is closed, Saudi oil must be transshipped though SUMED, a pipeline paralleling the Suez Canal. Of course, this northern route adds enormous amounts of time and money to Saudi oil shipments destined for India, China and other Asian markets. 

To add insult to injury, the Iran War has also drawn Iraq's pro-Iranian militias into the conflict. On the evening of September 10th and continuing into September 11th, missiles launched by militias in Iraq struck the Petroline, damaging pipelines and pumps and closing it. The pipeline is being repaired and is now resuming operations Saudi Arabia restarts East-West oil pipeline, sources say 

Nevertheless, the Petroline remains vulnerable to attacks from Iraqi militias. While the Iraqi government has claimed for years that it would disarm the militias and integrate them into its national defense forces, this still hasn't occurred. The militias have stationed considerable forces along the Iraqi-Saudi border in the south which Tehran can activate to attack Saudi oil facilities at any time. From Maysan to Saudi Arabia, drone attack puts Iraqi province under scrutiny

If the threat to Saudi oil shipments through the Red Sea wasn't a dangerous enough extension of the Iran War, the Houthis have upped the ante by attacking Saudi backed forces of the internationally recognized Yemeni government which controls the south and southeastern portions of the country.  On September 10th, the same day the Petroline was struck by missiles from Iraq, the Houthis mounted a large scale attack on government forces.

Once the smoke cleared, government forces had cut and run, leaving much of their heavy weaponry behind, giving the Houthis a decisive victory. The Houthis were able to capture the important port city of Mocha and gain control of the entire length of Yemen's Red Sea coastline. Recently, it has become clear that this attack was planned last summer with the help of the IRGC's Quds Force which is responsible for external military operations. Iranian agents have delivered parts for sophisticated missiles and taught the Houthis how to build them.

In July, the Houthis targeted Saudi Arabia's oil refineries, replicating earlier attacks on oil facilities in the Kingdom. This month, the attacks dramatically increased and instead focused on military targets in the Kingdom. The Houthis attacked Riyadh, Taif, Yanbu, Khamis Mushait, Bish and even Mecca. Despite a request from Crown Prince Muhammad Bin Salman, Saudi Arabia's de facto ruler, that Donald Trump send American forces to counter the Houthi attacks, POTUS refused Saudi Arabia Downs Houthi Missiles Targeting Kingdom, Official Says 

With Iranian support, and control over Yemen's Red Sea coast, its capital, Sana'a, and the most densely populated parts of Yemen in the north and northwest, the Houthis are well placed to support Iran in keeping oil prices in flux, making it difficult to export oil from the Saudi Arabia and the Gulf, and posing a military threat to Saudi Arabia 'We simply don't know' - JP Morgan struggling to forecast oil prices due to Trump's war with Iran

The Iran War and the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East A core justification by the United States and Israel for attacking Iran was to prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon. Although much of its enriched uranium lies underneath the rubble of nuclear facilities which the US and Israel bombed in June 2025 and then again after February 28th of this year, the Iranians still possess the capability to develop nuclear weapons.

Many analysts have argued that the war has brought the most hardline elements of the IRGC to power. Under Supreme Leader Ali Khamanei, there was at least a fatwa (religious decree) banning Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Now the hardliners argue that acquiring such a weapon is mandatory to prevent Iran from being attacked by the United States and Israel in the future. It is likely that such efforts will begin again, especially if the United States and Iran can't come to an agreement to end their current conflict.

Given the Iran War, which began without consulting it, and the unreliability of depending on an American defense umbrella, Saudi Arabia is now considering developing its own nuclear industry and weaponry. Trump recently agreed to provide the Kingdom with nuclear energy technology for civilian purposes. Although the Saudi monarchy would be prohibited from using the technology to develop nuclear weapons, after Congressional criticism, Trump withdrew the offer. Saudi Arabia Open to Possibly Developing Nuclear Weapons

What these developments suggest is that Saudi Arabia may very well turn to Russia and China in its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Because both nations seek to expand their influence in the oil and natural gas rich Gulf region, there is a strong incentive for Putin and Xi Jinping to begin by helping Saudi Arabia develop a civilian nuclear technology industry. If Saudi Arabia does begin work on a civilian nuclear program, which could eventually be used to produce nuclear weapons, there is little doubt that Turkey and probably Egypt would follow suit.

Ironically, there is a strong possibility that a war which was initiated to prevent Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapon will not only fail in that goal but promote the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the MENA region. By not factoring in the extensive use of interceptors to interdict Iranian drones which has deprived US forces of critical weaponry, and failing to protect Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf states from Iranian drone attacks, Trump has undermined their confidence in the United States as a defense partner. This outcome demonstrates again the incompetence of Trump who had no idea of what he was doing when he launched the attack with Israel on Iran this past February.

Empowering Russia and China Vladimir Putin's has repaid Iran many times over for its support in helping him develop factories in Russia to produce the highly effective Shahed 3 drone. It seems clear that Russian intelligence provided to the Tehran regime after the US-Israeli attack allowed it to better target American military bases. During attacks on bases in Kuwait and Jordan, 9 American servicemen were killed and many more wounded. Russia has helped Iran build sophisticated ballistic and cruise missiles and rearmed it through shipments delivered via the Caspian Sea. Russia’s Wartime Support for Iran

Despite Putin's active involvement in providing Iran with military support before and during the current war, Trump continues to laud the Russian autocrat. Admiring him for his dictatorial powers, Trump seeks to shape his own presidency according to Putin's model. Over the objection of European members, Trump has invited Putin to attend the G20 Summit which will be held in Miami this coming December. Trump also angered members of the G20 by inviting Russia's sanctioned finance minister to attend the G20 ministerial finance meeting in Asheville, North Carolina, earlier this year.  

Even though the US Senate recently passed a bill, the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, named in honor of the late South Carolina senator, may observers feel that Trump will not enforce the bill, even though he signed it into law. Indeed, under Trump, the United States has adopted policies more favorable to Russia, despite the fact that it was Putin who launched the unprovoked war against Ukraine in February 2022 and has continued to brutally attack the country. What’s really behind Trump’s deference to Putin? 

Trump's war has not only enhanced Russia's influence in Iran and the Gulf region but China's as well. Indeed, the Brookings Institution argues that China is the real victor in the Iran War. As a result of the war, China has been able to argue that the US commitment to defense agreements cannot be trusted, with the implications that entering such agreements should be avoided. 

For the first time in decades, the United States lacks an aircraft carrier in the South China Sea. The US likewise has transferred many interceptor batteries from East Asia to the Middle East.  These developments have encouraged Chinese President Xi Jinping to adopt a more aggressive policy towards incorporating Taiwan into mainland China against its will How the Iran war benefits China’s global ambitions

By continuing to purchase large amounts of Iranian oil, China has effectively propped up Iran's economy. It has used a barter system to provide Iran with billions of dollars worth of goods, including arms and the resupply of parts needed for its missiles and drones. China has enabled Iran to circumvent many of the international sanctions imposed on it by enabling it to enter multilateral organizations such as the BRICS group and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Enabling Iran: A Timeline of China’s Role During and After Operation Epic Fury

Impact of the war on the global economy While this topic deserves a separate, lengthy treatment, we should not forget the impact of the Trump-Netanyahu War  on the world's farmers. Large numbers of farmers have been deprived of the necessary fertilizer which traditionally has been shipped from the Gulf region. With reduced capacity to grow their crops, the Trump-Netanyahu war has created more global food insecurity, especially in poorer countries.

The significant rise in energy prices, especially diesel fuel which is used in railroad engines and tractor trailers, has increased the price of a wide variety of goods from food to home heating oil, to airline tickets and construction materials and much more. The destruction of a large part of Qatar's natural gas industry will take 3-5 years to repair before it can return to pre-war production levels, keeping the price of natural gas considerably higher than it would have been had the war not been started.  And we have seen riots in many countries throughout the world in response to rising gasoline prices. 

But Donald Trump could care less about how his war has negatively affected the world (and the same can be said of Benjamin Netanyahu).  As Thomas Friedman notes in a recent Opinion column in The New York Times, Trump has caused severe damage to the United States, the Middle East and the world:

"Alas...when someone as morally warped as Trump - whose first secretary of state called him a "moron" - assumes this much unchecked power at the dawn of the Age of Artificial Intelligence, he can't be ignored. Because right now, Trump is leaving America exposed to dangerous viruses: digital, biological, and diplomatic. Something bad is going to happen as a result. We and our children are going to pay for this, and not only at the gas pump. Trump Is Going Viral in the Worst Ways 

Will the "Economic D-Day" Bring Iran to its Knees or Will It Become Another Trump Foreign Policy Failure?

Scott Bessent at his August 24th press conference

Six months ago today, the United States and Israel mounted a surprise attack on Iran. During the first wave of the attack, Supreme Leader Ali Khamanei, was killed, as well as and many senior Iranian political and military officials. During the next few weeks, massive American and Israeli bombing destroyed Iran's air force, much of its navy and left many military installations in rubble. 

Despite the United States and Israel's massive military power, the Tehran regime is still in power and, in many respects, even stronger than before the February 28th attack. The prolonging of the war, which Donald Trump claimed would end in 6 weeks, shows no sign of ending. What then is the status of the conflict now in its sixth month?

In the latest chapter of the war with Iran, Donald Trump has said that he will wage an "economic D-Day" against Iran, namely impose a massive amount of sanctions designed to force the so- called Islamic Republic to capitulate. What exactly is this new policy and does it have any chance of bringing the current conflict to and end?

Aside from dishonoring the thousands of American troops who invaded France in June 1944 at a great cost of lives lost, the use of the term "economic D-Day" is both a misnomer and a gross exaggeration of what it claims it will accomplish.  Dubbed "Operation Economic Outcast" by Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, who is in charge of imposing the sanctions, the strategy of forcing Iran to return to the negotiating table and accede to Trump administration demands are the goals. But how to actually achieve them is vague at best.

At Bessent's August 24th press conference where he outlined Operation Economic Outcast, it was already clear that the sanctions' threat was exaggerated. If it were to succeed, it was dependent on the cooperation of a wide variety of international actors. Bessent threatened to sanction any state which continued to engage in financial ties with the Tehran regime.

Bessent's press conference didn't make clear what the new sanctions regime was intended to achieve.  Was Iran's collapse the goal, its capitulation to Trump's demands, or a compromise which would provide an offramp for the United States, i.e., a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz?  Bessent's failure to make the objectives of Operation Economic Outcast clear was in keeping with the Trump administration's ambiguity about the outcome of the war with Iran.

The proposed sanctions regime If Iran's neighbors, Iraq and Pakistan, don't adhere to Trump's threat of sanctions, then that will already create problems for the new sanctions' impact. Iraq has been a source of dollars as well as a source of commodities for Iran through smuggling and money laundering. Because Iraq's pro-Iranian militia movement, the Popular Mobilization Forces (al-Hashad al-Sha'bi), depends on the financial ties with Iran, there is no reason to expect them to stop their smuggling operations now.  

Iraq is also dependent on Iran for energy supplies in the form of electricity and natural gas. It purchases 50 million cubic meters of natural gas per day and large amounts if electric power depending on the season . Through such purchases, Iran receives large payments which bolster its economy.  

As for Pakistan, it has made clear that it's not bound by the new US sanctions because it is a neutral party in the US-Iran conflict. Only if the United Nations declares that. the sanctions should be imposed will it then adhere to them.  Further, the United States and Pakistan have developed much closer ties under the Trump administration and high ranking Pakistani military and political officials have served as intermediaries for US-Iran negotiatins.

Given the weakness of Iraq's government, which is caught between competing pressures from the United States and Iran, it is highly doubtful if the Trump administration will sanction Iran.  With the Islamic State active in eastern Syria and parts of northwestern Iraq, the US would be ill advised to undermine its relations with Iraq. Because Pakistan retains its role as an important point of contact with Iran, sanctioning it won't happen either.  

Far more important for the imposing the sanctions is the reaction of  Russia, India and especially China.  After Bessent's press conference, the Chinese government indicated that it would not be bound by any United States sanctions. Even though China imports a considerable amount of Iranian oil, it is treated as an unofficial trading relationship. Iranian oil is off loaded near Malaysia to local tankers which then deliver it it to small "teapot" refineries along China's southeastern coast. 

Although China's imports of Iranian oil have declined form 1.2 to 1.4 million bpd to 534,000 bpd as of this month, the Beijing regime still seeks to have access to this oil because it is able to purchase it as a discounted price.  

Nor is President Xi Jinping keen to help Donald Trump extricate himself from the dilemma he faces in confronting Iran. The more time and effort the United States and its military forces need to devote to the Iran conflict, including maintaining the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, the less time it has to monitor and push back at China's efforts to increase its power and influence in the South China Sea and the larger East Asian region.

Further, Xi is an authoritarian leader who need not worry about elections and public opinion. Trump's ill-conceived war with Iran has never been adequately explained to the American public.  In the first hours of the attack, the war's endgame was regime change.  The it became a narrative about Iran not being allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. More recently, the war's goals have been reduced to reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which was already open (and toll-free) on February 27, 2026.

Loss of domestic support for the war The "whiplash" effect of Trump constantly changing the discourse and objectives of the war has embarrassed the United States internationally and reduced its credibility as a global power.  The Whiplash War

Trump's multiple threats against Iran have largely proved to be empty ones. At the same time, his erratic behavior and the war's impact on the domestic economy have led a very large percentage of Americans to reject the war as an unnecessary expenditure of funds which should instead be used to improve the American economy. What Americans think about Trump’s handling of Iran, according to a new AP-NORC poll

It is also clear that the attack on Iran has undermined the United States' military readiness.It has used so many interceptors to shoot down Iran's large collection of cheap drones which have been directed at America bases in the Arab Gulf, and Jordan, and at a large number of other non-military facilities in the Gulf, wreaking extensive destruction. The war has demonstrated that using a $4 million Patriot missile to destroy an Iranian drone which costs between $35,000 and $50,000 to build represents a highly misplaced use of military expenditures Exclusive: US Patriot missile stocks in Europe are ‘beyond critical’ due to Iran war, officials say

In short, Operation Economic Outcast has made both Trump and Scott Bessent look foolish. Virtually, all analyses of the strategy argue that it is bound to fail.  The brutal Iranian regime needs to be toppled, but that can only be done through a coordinated International effort.  Saudi Arabia, the Arab Guf states, and the European Union would all need to become incolved

Unfortunately, Trump's narcissistic style of rule prohibits such as effort.  There is little reason to believe that when Trump leaves the White House in January 2029, the current conflict with Iran will still not have been solved.  In short, Trump's ill fated attack on Iran will certainly go down in the annals of American foreign policy history as one of the worst decisions any United States president has ever made.

Who is Ali al-Zaidi? A New Beginning for Iraq or Another Act of Political Theater?

Who is Ali al-Zaidi? At 41, he is the youngest prime minister to be appointed to that position in Iraq. A billionaire businessman, he never has held political office and lacks political experience. Why, it might be asked, has a relatively unknown been appointed to Iraq's most important post? More broadly, is al-Zaidi's appointment a political breath of fresh air, or is it politics as usual in post-Ba'thist Iraq?

After national elections in November 2025, it took Iraq until May 14th to select a new prime minister to replace outgoing Muhammad Shi'a al-Sudani. The six month period for choosing a prime minister is par for the course in Iraqi politics. Both al-Sudani and former prime minister Nuri al-Maliki fought for the position.

When al-Maliki was on the verge of being selected last April, the Trump administration vigorously opposed him given his close ties to Iran. Trump threatened severe consequences, specifically economic isolation and an end of US military support, if al-Maliki became prime minister. Trump's opposition forced al-Maliki to withdrew his candidacy. Iraqi Politics in Ferment after Trump’s Broadside   

When neither al-Maliki or al-Sudani, nor their suggested compromise candidates, were able to win, al-Zaidi was proposed for prime minister. Faiq Zaidan, the Chief Justice of Iraq's Supreme Judiciary Council and a intermediary in a number of contentious political appointment struggles, played a key role in promoting al-Zaidi. It took seven meetings before al-Maliki and al-Sudani agreed on al-Zaidi's candidacy.

The decision to nominate al-Zaidi was finalized at a meeting at the home of Falih Fayyad. Because Fayyad heads the Popular Mobilization Units (al-hashad al-sha'bi), that venue suggests that Iraq's pro-Iranian militia movement supported al-Zaidi and expects to play a central role in his decision-making process. 

At the same time, Zaidan and the vast majority of Iraqis, both Arabs and Kurds, strongly oppose Iraq's involvement in the US-Iran War and attacks by militia forces on American installations in Iraq. Despite this opposition, some militias continue to strike American interests in Iraq and have even fired missiles into Saudi Arabia, threatening to open yet another front in the war. Thus, al-Zaidi's appointment already points to the problems he will face in balancing the goals of contending political factions Iraq in the Vise

Why was al-Zaidi chosen as prime minister? Given his highly successful career as a businessman, and his ties with the Iraqi government though multiple state contracts, al-Zaidi is seen as acceptable to both the United States and Iran. In terms of domestic politics, al-Zaidi's youth and ties to Iraq's higher education system present an image, especially to Iraq's highly disaffected youth, of a young entrepreneur who might be able to enact critically needed reforms and thus bring about social change.

However, al-Zaidi is a default candidate. No political party considered him its first choice. Instead, he was viewed as a way, even if temporary, to end a long and protracted struggle to select a successor to Muhammad Shi'a al-Sudani. Further, al-Zaidi poses no threat to any of Iraq's powerful political interests. He has no party of his own, controls no militia and lacks a support base in the Iraqi parliament. 

On the other hand, al-Zaidi maintains close ties to Iraq's militia movement which is closely tied to Iran. The al-Junoob Islamic Bank, which he founded and chaired, was cited for money laundering in 2024 for the illicit transfer of funds to Iran. While al-Zaidi heads the board of directors of al-Sha'b University, which he claims is Iraq's first digital university, the university is closely linked to al-Sadiqun (the Truthful Ones), the political arm of one of Iraq's most powerful militias, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haqq (League of the Righteous People).

al-Zaidi's academic degrees in banking and finance, his many contracts with the state, such as heading the National Ration Card and food basket distribution system for the Ministry of Trade in 2017, as well as his serving as CEO of al-Dijla television network and owning a large and highly profitable supermarket chain present an impressive resume.   

In short, al-Zaidi checks off all the required boxes. He presents no threat to any of the major political parties. His image as a successful entrepreneur dedicated to reform is one which pleases the Trump administration.  His ties to the militia movement and financial help he has given Iran makes him welcome in Teheran. Who is Ali al-Zaidi, the businessman named as Iraq’s PM-designate?

Indeed, during his recent visit to the White House, al-Zaidi impressed Donald Trump with his business successes and wealth. Trump not only commented on his good looks - "He's young and he's handsome" - but said the two leaders had a "terrific chemistry." Trump opined that al-Zaidi's influence would spread far beyond Iraq and that numerous American corporations in the energy and infrastructure sectors would be investing in Iraq.

Thus, the Coordination Framework's choice of  al-Zaidi as prime minister was a shrewd move. Initiating an anti-corruption campaign, the "Dawn Offensive" (Sawlat al-Fajr) on June 28th, which has led to the arrest of large numbers of government officials, al-Zaidi sought to send a message to Trump that a new era in Iraqi politics was at hand. Trump views al-Zaidi as pursuing a more independent regional role for Iraq, namely an "Iraq First" policy.

Nevertheless,  after visiting the United States on July 14th, al-Zaidi travelled to Tehran where he signed a number of economic agreements with Tehran.  Although the visit was cordial,  Iran demanded that Iraq pay a long overdue natural gas bill. For his part, al-Zaidi asked Iran to assure the safe passage of Iraqi oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz but received no assurances from the Iranians. Exclusive: Tehran Pressed Al-Zaidi to Pay $11 Billion in Gas Debt

Ali al-Zaidi: Myth vs. Reality Because no one party dominates the parliament, the selection of a new prime minister has always been a protracted process.  The Coordination Framework, a coalition of Shi'a political parties, has fought over the position of prime minister since Ayad 'Allawi was the first to be chosen as prime minister after Iraq's post-Ba'thist 2005 elections. While 'Allawi was Sunni, all subsequent prime ministers have been Shi'a. Once the new political system was established, a confessional model (al-muhassasa) was instituted: a Shi'a would be prime minister, the president would be a Kurd and the speaker of parliament would be Sunni.

The key decision in choosing a new prime minister is not his leadership qualities. What is most important is the extent to which he is able to satisfy all the key political parties in distributing control of specific ministries and government offices. A spoils system, rather than civic commitment, defines Iraqi politics. All parties seek access to state funds and contracts. As long as state funds derived from Iraq's lucrative oil revenues remain available to Iraq's power brokers, the political system, fragmented as it is, muddles along.  

Citizen needs continue to be ignored Lost in this political shuffle are critically needed services required by Iraq's citizens. Because medicines imported by the state are often sold on the black market, public hospitals either lack necessary medicines or only have expired medications. Before the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War, Iraq had arguably the best health care system in the Middle East. Today that system has been seriously degraded.

Electricity is another commodity in short supply. The Iran-Iraq War and 1991 Gulf War devastated much of Iraq's infrastructure.  As a result, between 30-50% of electric power is lost in transit due to dilapidated power lines. Also, much of the natural gas, which is a byproduct of oil extraction, is lost to flaring rather than captured and used to power electricity generation. 

Instead, Iraq needs to import natural gas and electricity from neighboring Iran. Subsidized fees for electricity and the theft of electricity adds to Iraq's shortages. Despite billions of dollars of investment in improving the electricity sector since Saddam Husayn's regime was ousted, much of those funds has been lost to corruption.

Despite it being one of the five countries in the world experiencing the most negative impact of global warming, Iraq's government has done little to cope with the destructive effect of climate change. Agriculture in large parts of southern Iraq has collapsed due to the lack of water caused by a persistent drought and the desertification of arable land. Farmers are forced to leave their land and migrate to cities where jobs are few and far between.Drought in the Land of Plenty: The Impacts of Climate Change on Iraqi Security

The new prime minister's stated vision focus on institutional reform, empowering youth, and diversifying Iraq's economy  from a centrally planned system dependent almost exclusively on oil revenues to a more open and sustainable economy.  How realistic are these goals?

Ali al-Zaidi's platform First, al-Zaidi has given Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units until September 30th to disarm and finally be placed under government control. However, there is no possibility that the PMUs will agree to this demand, leaving al-Zaidi looking weak and unable to control Iraq's internal security.Why disarmament will not solve Iraq’s civic space paradox

Further, al-Zaidi's "Dawn Offensive," whose goal is to clean up the massive corruption which plagues the Iraqi state, is doomed to failure.  Although he said "there is no red line" in attacking corruption, meaning that officials at the highest level will not be exempt from arrest and prosecution, the campaign thus far tells a very different story. 

Arrests have been limited to second and third tier state ministers and their deputies. Most have been officials associated with former prime minister Muhammad Shia al-Sudani's party. While publicly supporting the anti-corruption campaign, al-Sudani's Development and Reconstruction Coaction has privately attacked al-Zaidi's tactics, together with other Shi'a parties in Iraq's parliament. The key issue here is that the anti-corruption campaign is targeting individual politicians, not the institutional structure of corruption which is at the core of the problem  Iraqi PM faces backlash from political parties over his bold anti-corruption drive

According to Iraqi sources, Nuri al-Maliki controls much of al-Zaidi's decision-making. That the main focus of the Dawn Offensive in targeting al-Sudani's supporters would seem to substantiate this argument. If so, al-Maliki has been able to make an end run around the Trump White House and, in a de facto sense, is currently running the Iraqi state.

One of the main grievances of Iraqi youth is their inability to obtain jobs, especially those in the state bureaucracy. This was one of the causes of the October 2019 Revolution (Thawrat Tishrin). Indeed, there have been many examples of university graduates, even those with Ph.D.s in science and technology, being told that obtaining employment was dependent on their paying a large bribe to ministry officials. Often lacking the funds, highly educated youth have been forced to engage instead in menial work. The Killing of Qasem Suleimani and Iraq’s October Revolution: What Western Analysts Aren’t Telling You But What You Need to Know

The chickens came home to roost in Iraq long ago One of the colossal failures of US foreign policy was appointing politicians to powerful political position's in Iraq according to their confessional identity.  Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz argued, after Saddam Husayn's regime was toppled, that giving Iraq's Shi'a political power would assure continued American influence in Baghdad. 

Wolfowitz's argument was common among neo-conservatives. They argued that, because the Shi'a, like the Jewish people, had suffered historical persecution by Sunni Muslims (who dominated Saddam's regime), they would be forever thankful to the United States for giving them political power.

This argument was absurd for many reasons. First, the Shi'a politicians the Bush administration supported, such as Nuri al-Maliki who was appointed prime minister in 2006, were allies of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Many had lived in exile in Iran while Saddam's regime was in power. 

George Bush meeting with Abd al-Aziz al-Hakim, Dec 2006

'Abd al-'Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Republic In Iraq (SCIRI), formed in 1982 in Iran and led for its first 2 years by members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), was a key adviser to the Bush administration prior to and after the US invasion of Iraq. All of the Shi'a exiles Bush chose, with Wolfowitz's encouragement, were authoritarian and ultimately highly corrupt. The rule of the turban

Second, Iraqis are much more committed to tribal culture than formal Islam. Virtually, all Arab tribes have both Sunni and Shi'a clans and there has been high rates of Sunni-Shi'a marriages, especially in large cities such as Baghdad. Indeed, Iraqis who visited the White House found it highly insulting when George Bush consistently began meetings by asking whether they were Sunni or Shi'a. (For a critique of post-2003 US policy in Iraq, see my:  From the Promise of Democracy to Sectarian Capture of the State: United States Policy and the Building of a New Political Order in Post-Ba'thist Iraq)

The Iran War: the 800 pound gorilla in Ali al-Zaidi's room This week, Ali al-Zaidi was expected to continue his tour to MENA region and European countries to promote investment opportunities in Iraq. The next venue was to be Saudi Arabia where Muhammad Bin Salman has been keen to invest in Iraq as a means of lessening Iranian influence. 

However, 2 days before al-Zaidi's trip, pro-Iranian militias attacked Saudi Arabia. The attack led to a joint Saudi-American attack on Iraq's militia forces which killed 20 fighters, including advisors from Iran's IRGC. The PMU blowback was immediate and furious. Not only was al-Zaidi was forced to cancel his trip to Riyadh, but obliged to request a meeting at the United Nations to condemn the attack. Meanwhile, the PMU demanded that the Iraqi government develop a response to what it termed the "United States-Saudi aggression." 20 PMF members killed, 32 wounded in attacks across Iraq

What these militia attacks on Saudi Arabia make clear is that Iran will use its Iraqi proxies to prevent the development of further economic ties with Saudi Arabia. Because economic development is purportedly one of al-Zaidi's main calling cards, it is doubtful that Iraq will see Saudi investments any time soon.  Further, if Iraq gets dragged into the US-Iran conflict, US and other foreign investors will be reluctant to commit to new economic projects as well.

Ali al-Zaidi's future as Iraq's prime minister. Iraqis have a saying about the majority of their politicians. They call them "burnt cards" (al-awraq al-mahruqa). These are politicians who have lost their ability to influence politics.  Instead, they become nothing more than pawns for other more powerful political forces to manipulate. Based al-Zaidi's track record during the short time he has been in office, it seems that he too will join the ranks of the "burnt cards.

Israel: From Ethnic Democracy to International Isolation

Myriad anti-Semites, neo-Nazis and radical Islamist terrorists would be delighted if Israel no longer existed. Fortunately, Israel has been able to sustain itself over time. It has maintained the necessary military prowess to defend itself from multiple external threats. But what if currently, the real threat facing Israel isn't from external enemies but internal ones? Could the Zionist state collapse be caused by its current political trajectory to become what some Israeli observers have called a "Jewish Iran,"namely a theocratic autocracy? Gilad Kariv: The Ultraorthodox will turn Israel into a Jewish Iran

The three threats What are the threats which Israel faces?  There are three: regional, domestic and international, namely relations with its Western allies, especially the United States. Even though some of these threats appear external in nature, they really emanate from and are exacerbated by the far-right turn of the Israeli government, namely the current ultra-nationalist "Greater Israel" cabinet headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. His regime has alienated Israel from most countries in the world.  

First, as a result of two attacks on Iran, one in June 2025, and another this past February, conducted by the United States and Israel but actively encouraged by Netanyahu, Iran is a greater threat to Israel and the MENA region than it was before the attacks. Most analysts now feel that the intensive bombing, especially because it occurred during ongoing negotiations between Iran and the United States, will lead Iran to intensify its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. 

Because a military campaign limited to bombing has demonstrated that it can't eliminate Iran's nuclear weapons program, and neither the United States nor Israel is willing to use ground troops to extract Iran's enriched uranium, the only way to control its nuclear program is through diplomacy.  

However, Iran cannot be trusted to negotiate in good faith. If it did agree to outside inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, it would impose onerous terms for this concession. These terms would require that the United States and the West end international sanctions and release frozen Iranian funds held abroad. Short of a ground invasion, that is the only way to curtail Iran's efforts to obtain nuclear weapons.

The February 2026 attack on Iran initiated a new war in Lebanon between Israel and Hizballah, Iran's proxy militia which is controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). As Israel's occupation of Lebanon from 1982 to 2000 demonstrates, when it withdrew after experiencing high casualties, it is not possible to completely defeat Hizballah. Instead, Israel finds itself bogged down in south Lebanon, a mountainous region while Hizballah continues to fire missiles at its northern towns and farms.

Not only has Israel's invasion of Lebanon, which has also resulted in multiple attacks on sections of Beirut where Hizballah commanders are said to be headquartered, but it has displaced large numbers of Lebanese in the south. Its scorched earth policies where entire villages have been demolished, many of which are inhabited by Shi'a but many also by Christians, has caused an international outcry. Obviously, the homes and property of many Lebanese who have nothing to do with Hizballah are losing their livelihoods and sometimes even being wounded or killed during clashes between Hizballah and the Israeli Army. 

Israel's campaign against Hizballah has taken a toll on Israel's economy because large number of reservists have been pulled from their jobs to serve in the army. There is little doubt that, if the Lebanon campaign continues for a lengthy period, it will spur more Israelis to consider emigrating to Europe, the United States or Australia or, as has occurred more recently, to Germany Cyprus and East Asian countries. Israel's current population growth rate is 0.9%, far below the population replacement rate. Israel 2025: A Demographic Crossroads; More than 69,000 Israelis left Israel in 2025, as population reached 10.18 million

The second threat exacerbated by the Netanyahu regime's far-right policies has been his alienation of secular Israelis, while simultaneously emboldening those on the far-right who seek to create a "Greater Israel." Under the auspices of far-right Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has been convicted 8 times for racism and incitement to violence, extremist groups on the West Bank have received large numbers of rifles and told that attacks on Palestinian civilians in the West Bank wouldn't result in legal reprisals. How Israel's Settler Movement is Creating a New Generation of Terrorist Youth

Another problem is the rapid growth of Israel's ultra-orthodox Haredi population. Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics projects that the Haredim will constitute 16% of the population by 2030, rising to 24% by 2050 and 50% of the Jewish population by 2059-2065. If we add the growth of settlements in the West Bank which include large numbers of ultra-nationalists who believe that God willed Judea and Samaria - the ancient Israeli terms for the West Bank - to the Jews, Israel will become a nation-state controlled by the ultra-orthodox and Jewish ultra-nationalists. (For an excellent analysis of Israel's turn towards politicized religion, see Yoav Peled and Horit Hermann Peled, The Religionization of Israeli Society).

Haredi men, who don't pay taxes and whose families receive government subsidies,  overwhelmingly refuse to serve in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), except in some instances in ancillary, non-combat roles. Efforts to remove the Haredim's exemption from serving in the military has led to strong condemnation by ultra-orthodox rabbis who feel that serving in the military will "secularize" them. Haredim have organized large scale demonstrations against efforts to enlist their members into the army. Haredi protesters successfully halt draft dodger arrest near Jerusalem, police leave scene - report

These domestic developments suggest that Jewish youth in Western countries, particularly the United States, will find making aliyah (emigrating) to Israel an increasing unattractive proposition. Few will be drawn to living in a right-wing theocratic state. This is especially true if larger numbers of secular Jews leave Israel as a result of its international isolation. Indeed, many Israeli tourist feel uncomfortable admitting their nationality when traveling abroad due to the hostility toward their country. Poll: Most Israelis fear they won’t be able to travel abroad as global anger mounts

Another issue which has yet to be addressed is the impact on Israel's far right turn on its cybersecurity industry. Israel's high tech sector have seen widespread demand for its products throughout the world. In 2025, its profits were one of the highlights of Israel's economy, accounting for 50% of GDP growth. Israel Innovation Authority Releases 2026 Hi-Tech Report

However, during the massive anti-regime demonstrations against Netanyahu's attempt to end the Supreme Court's judicial review power in 2023, the high tech industry was at the center of opposition to it. This opposition was based on ideological, democratic and financial grounds. High tech firms see Netanyahu's undermining Israel's democracy as  creating economic instability, e.g., as seen in the changing value of the shekel, the national currency, thus undermining Israel's attraction as an investment opportunity. It is no wonder that Israel is experiencing a "brain drain" of R&D employees and the relocation of many of its cybersecurity firms abroad. Israel judicial plan sparks brain drain fears, threatens US tech gateway: VC firm

The third problem Israel faces, and perhaps the most profound and dangerous one, is its alienation from former supporters in the West. Much of this shift in support has occurred during the period when Benjamin Netanyahu has served a s prime minister. His full-scale promotion of the expansion of West Bank settlements, all considered illegal under international law, his attempts to use Palestinian Arab voting as a scare tactic to mobilize Jewish votes, and his efforts to turn Israel into an authoritarian state have led some European Union states to decide to end arms sales, cut back on economic agreements with Israel, and recognize an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. 

How the Netanyahu regime' has undermined Western support for Israel Benjamin Netanyahu, who has served as prime minister over three terms totaling more than19 years, longer than any other Israeli prime minister. Under his watch, Israel has progressively moved ever farther to the right. Today, Israel has the dubious distinction of being ruled by the most far-right, ultra-nationalist cabinet since the state was founded in 1948. 

At its founding, Israel was arguably the most democratic state in the MENA region. It garnered widespread Western support. Its leaders spoke English and were adept at interacting with Western politicians in a manner in which Arab political leaders were not. Most European states felt duty-bound to strongly support Israel given the Holocaust which occurred on their soil. A large pro-Israel Jewish voting block in key regions of the United States, such as the Northeast, California and Illinois produced strong American support. 

However, Israel was from its founding an ethnic democracy. Its Palestinian Arabs, those who had not been forced to leave their lands in 1948 by the Arab-Israeli War, or expelled by Zionist forces, and were subsequently absorbed into Israel, are still second class citizens. Much like African-Americans in the United States, they remain to this day on the margins of Israeli society.  

When Netanyahu's Likud Party enacted a law in 2018 which declared that Israel was a "state for the Jewish people," many Israelis and foreign governments condemned it as racist and anti-democratic. Certainly, the law sent a message to Israel's Palestinian Arab citizens that their second class status would not just be de facto but institutionalized Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People

Prior to the October 7, 2023, attack by HAMAS terrorists, Netanyahu's far-right government was seeking to strip Israel's Supreme Court of its right to judicial review. Large number of Israelis saw this effort as an attempt to impose authoritarian rule. Nightly demonstrations rocked Tel Aviv and Jerusalem as hundreds of thousands protested in the streets. 

If Netanyahu had been (and might still be) successful in marginalizing the Supreme Court, the single chamber parliament - the Knesset - would have no check on any legislation it passed. Thus, the far right could impose majoritarian rule, constraints on political participation, limit personal freedoms and ride roughshod over minority rights at will. Only the HAMAS attack in October 2023 forced Netanyahu to drop his anti-Supreme Court campaign and turn his attention to the Gaza crisis. Beyond Historical Amnesia, Revenge and the Good-Evil Binary: Solving the Israeli-Palestinian Dispute Once and For All

At first, Israel received widespread international support in reaction to the brutality of HAMAS' attack. However, the policy that the Netanyahu regime pursued in fighting HAMAS soon eroded this support. As civilian casualties rose precipitously (over 70,000 at this writing), especially among women and children, cries of " war crimes," "crimes against humanity" and then "genocide" were directed at Netanyahu and the IDF. Safety Is When There’s No One Dying 

It is important to note that the charges of genocide weren't made by Israel's enemies alone.  A notable example is Brown University professor and genocide scholar, Dr. Omer Bartov, who was born and raised in Israel and served in the IDF. Dr. Bartov wrote an important Opinion Essay in The New York Times, A Genocide Scholar on the Case Against Israel. More recently, he published a book expanding on the reasons why Israel has exchanged its democratic values for ethnonationalism. Israel: What Went Wrong?

A recent report by the United Nations Human Rights on the Gaza War concluded that the IDF purposefully targeted children as part of its military strategy. The Report's conclusion were shocking. In effect, it argued that the Netanyahu regime sought to ethnically cleanse Gaza by reducing the size of its youth population. This report constitutes yet another nail in the coffin leading to Israel's international isolation. “The essence of childhood has been destroyed”: Israel’s deliberate targeting of Palestinian children in the Occupied Palestinian Territory since 7 October 2023

Israel and the United States This month, Brad Lander, a former New York City comptroller and self-described liberal Zionist, won a primary election in New York City. One of the chief criticisms of his opponent, sitting Democratic Congressman, Dan Goldman, was that he was too beholden to AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) which has used large scale funding to defeat candidates and elected officials which is considers insufficiently supportive of Israel. Lander beat Goldman by over 30 points in New York City's congressional district with the largest number of Jewish voters. 

However, AIPAC support has now become toxic. Even Dan Goldman, who took AIPAC money in the past, refused to so in this election cycle. Despite seeking to disguise its support for its preferred candidate through its Super Pac, United Democracy Project, AIPAC is no longer the potent force it once was when it could defeat anti-Israel politicians at will. Brad Lander clinches early victory in NY-10

Although the phrase is no longer commonly used, Israel has been refereed to in the past as "the 51st state." Politicians of both parties often saw a visit to Israel as a de riguer part of their political campaign to demonstrate to Jewish voters their strong support for Israel. However, that is no longer the case.

The following set of graphs and charts point to the declining support for Israel - meaning more specifically the actions of the Netanyahu regime - by the American public. What is notable is the decline among young Americans. Because many young people, especially in the Democratic Party, are increasingly running for political office, this should be seen in Israel as a disturbing trend because these youth awill become the United States' future political leaders.  

If, as the above charts and graphs indicate, support for Israel in the United States, its most important backer in the international community, has experienced a sharp decline, why is this the case? On the one hand, we have Donald Trump's MAGA supporters who oppose the United States' participation in foreign wars. MAGA voters, often tainted by anti-Semitism, see Netanyahu as a duplicitous leader  They feel that he tries to draw the United States into wars which promote his personal political goals, but don't reflect American national interests.The GOP has been a pro-Israel party for decades. Is that changing?

MAGA views reflect a larger American worldview. Most Americans see the United States military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as disasters which cost many American (not to mention foreign) lives and squandered trillions of dollars which could have been better spent on needed services and development at home.  

On the other hand, large numbers of Democrats find Israel's destruction of Gaza reprehensible. They also view the wanton destruction and killing of Palestinians in the West Bank and destruction of their property as a process of ethnic cleansing which is often abetted by IDF troops stationed in there. Democrats in the United States Congress are increasingly unwilling to vote for providing Israel with arms and other forms of American foreign aid.  

The solution Grosso modo, solving the problem of Israel's international isolation is not complicated. In November 1947, United Nations Resolution 183 established two states in Palestine - one Jewish (Israel) and one Arab (Palestine). Establishing an independent Palestinian state living side by side with Israel is the key to ending much of the conflict in the Middle East. A truly sovereign Palestinian state would take the wind out of hostile sails in Iran and elsewhere in the region.

The first task is to vote the Netanyahu cabinet out of office in the fall 2026 elections. The second would be for a new Israeli government to end the settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, a suggestion Yair Lapid, a Netanyahu opponent for prime minister, has already made.

The next step would be to remove Mahmoud Abbas as President of the Palestine National Authority. Abbas was legally required to hold elections in 2013 which he refused to do. In other words, he doesn't have the legitimate authority to hold his office. Abbas takes funds from Netanyahu and helps Israeli security forces monitor Palestinians in the West Bank, while transferring large amounts of those funds to his two sons. At present, Abbas has lost all support among Palestinians, both inside the West Bank and beyond it.

Throughly corrupt, Abbas needs to be replaced by a legitimate Palestinian leader, such as Dr. Salam Fayyad, a highly respected US trained economist, who previously served as minister of finance and then prime minister. Fayyad was removed from office in June 2013 when he attempted to confront Abba's extensive corruption.

The two-state solution, with Jerusalem serving as a joint capital for Israel and Palestine, is seen by many as a chimera. However, it is based on the 1992 Oslo Accords which was agreed to by both Israel and the Palestinians. During a brief period following the signing of the Accords, a number of joint ventures were developed, bringing Israelis, Palestinians and Jordanian entrepreneurs together in tourism, telecommunications and real estate, indicating what could be the outcome of true, enduring peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

The two state solution would require the active involvement of the United States and the European Union to both pressure the Israeli government and to offer Israel security guarantees and provide economic "sweeteners" to entice both parties to come to a permanent agreement.  

An independent Palestinian state would allow Israel to benefit from financial ties with Saudi Arabia, empower Israel's Palestinian Arab citizens who could serve as intermediaries between the Arab world and Israel, and bring a new level of stability and prosperity to the MENA region.