ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY
On the wrong side of history
As President Trump returns to the White House, Tanya Vatsa reflects on the implications of US foreign policy vis-à-vis Israel and the wider Middle East
The enduring support of the United States for Israel, especially in the context of allegations surrounding violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL), represents a critical nexus of geopolitics and humanitarian concerns. This dynamic is not merely an isolated issue but a reflection of broader challenges in a region perpetually mired in strife. As this unfolds, the implications of US foreign policy, particularly during the Trump presidency, reflects the intricate web of power, law and diplomacy that shapes the Middle East.
America has consistently provided extensive military aid to Israel, funding that has cemented Israel’s status as a regional powerhouse. However, reports of Israeli military operations in Gaza employing US-supplied weaponry have sparked widespread criticism, with human rights organisations asserting that such actions contravene IHL and IHRL Instances of civilian casualties, the targeting of essential infrastructure and allegations of disproportionate force highlight the complexities of US involvement, as American support, whether perceived or direct, not only enables Israel’s military initiatives but also implicates Washington in the broader narrative of Palestinian suffering.
Trump’s presidency has reinforced the tone and direction of US-Israel relations. Joe Biden’s outgoing package of US$8 billion in arms aid to Israel was only invigorated by Trump’s release order on the supply of 2000-pound bombs to Israel (which were paused by Biden in response to calls for issuing an arms embargo on Israel).The seed of unconditional support was sown by Trump 1.0 in its recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital, by shifting the American diplomatic mission from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2018. Under Trump, the United States also unequivocally supported Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank and recognised contentious territorial claims, further emboldening Israeli leadership.
This overt alignment reinforced an atmosphere of impunity, allowing Netanyahu to pursue annexationist ambitions without fear of substantive international reprisals. Trump’s policies effectively signalled that American oversight would not extend to scrutinising Israeli actions in the occupied territories, creating a permissive environment for policies that exacerbated regional tensions.
US funding has cemented Israel’s status as a regional powerhouse
President Trump is known for his zeal regarding bringing American money back home with little concern for the consequences. The recalling of American troops from Afghanistan was a case in point, and today the country continues to witness gross violations of human rights of women and other minorities.
Now, at the start of his second term, the administration has paused foreign aid worth billions in order to check if this aligns with Trump’s foreign policy. A proposed freeze on military aid to Israel may have prompted reluctant adherence to a ceasefire, yet the freeze has, in fact, exempted military aid to Israel and Egypt, thus allowing alleged violations of the recent ceasefire dealby Tel Aviv.
Trump is known for his zeal regarding bringingUS money back home with little concern for the consequences
As the US pours billions into sustaining Israel’s military dominance, its attention is simultaneously demanded by two emergent threats: Hamas and the Islamic State in Syria. US actions are increasingly viewed as fuelling animosity, with Hamas exploiting the narrative of American complicity to galvanize support among Palestinians and across the Arab world. This growing antagonism towards the United States is mirrored in the rhetoric of IS, which is very likely to exploit the political chaos and weakened governance in Syria to stage a tentative resurgence.
The tenuous state of the Kurdish forces, previously the lynchpin of the US campaign against IS, compounds the problem. Diminished by sustained offensives and political marginalisation, the Kurds’ limited operational capacity leaves the US scrambling for alternatives to maintain its counterterrorism efforts in Syria. Yet the resources and attention necessary for this campaign are increasingly siphoned toward addressing the fallout from Israel’s military ventures and the enduring hostilities with Hamas.
This dual-front counterterrorism dilemma is set to become a larger looming threat. The unrelenting support for Israel not only exacerbates the conflict with Hamas but also diverts critical resources from addressing the equally pressing threat of IS in Syria. This strategic overstretch risks undermining the efficacy of American interventions, leaving both fronts inadequately addressed and further inflaming anti-American sentiment in the region.
And the impact of these policies extends beyond the immediate theatres of conflict. Relations between the United States and Arab nations, already strained, are further tested by Washington’s unwavering backing for Israel. While the Abraham Accords under Trump suggested a warming of ties with some Gulf states, the broader Arab world continues to view American actions as dismissive of Palestinian rights and sovereignty. This perception complicates American diplomatic efforts, as alliances are tested by the growing discontent of Arab populations whose solidarity with the Palestinian cause remains steadfast.
In navigating this complex terrain, the United States finds itself at a critical juncture. Its policies in support of Israel, while fulfilling strategic and ideological commitments, have inadvertently deepened the challenges posed by extremist groups and strained its capacity to address them effectively. The interconnected nature of these conflicts demands a more balanced approach, one that reconciles support for allies with the broader imperative of regional stability and adherenceto international norms. Without such recalibration, the US risks perpetuating a cycle of conflict that undermines its standing and effectiveness in a region pivotal to global peace and security.
Tanya Vatsa is currently the Geopolitical and Predictive Intelligence specialist at Inquest Advisories in India, as well as Editor at the Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs, Dept of Defence, United States of America. She completed her Master’s in Legal Studies at the University of Edinburgh after obtaining a law degree from Lucknow’s National Law University, India