Trump Has Already Chosen

Donald Trump’s visit to Israel was, without doubt, a unifying moment. Tens of thousands gathered in Hostages’ Square chanting “Thank you, Trump!” while, at the Knesset, the president received a hero’s welcome. He brought peace, he brought the hostages home — and he, more than anyone else, remains Israel’s most friendly American president. Trump did not hide his satisfaction. His ego swelled from the waves of adoration pouring from both the streets and the parliament.

As always, Trump’s speech swung between solemnity — when he read from the teleprompter — and stand-up comedy when he improvised, blending anecdotes, attacks on rivals, and self-congratulation. It was at times confusing, but his message left no room for doubt: after two years of war that ended with the return of the hostages, the election campaign had begun — and Trump had already made his choice.

“Bibi, please stand up,” he said from the Knesset podium, as Netanyahu’s loyal cheering section erupted in applause. “I want to express my gratitude to a man of exceptional courage and patriotism, whose cooperation did so much to make this great day possible. And he’s not easy,” Trump added with a grin. “Let me tell you, he’s not the easiest guy to deal with. But that’s what makes him great. That’s what makes him great. Thank you very much, Bibi. Great job.”

To remove any doubt, Trump turned toward President Isaac Herzog near the end of his address and said: “Hey, I have an idea. Mr. President, why don’t you give him a pardon? Come on. By the way, that wasn’t in the speech, as you know. But I like the man sitting right here, and it just seems so logical. You know, whether we like it or not, this was one of the greatest wartime leaders ever. One of the greatest wartime leaders. And cigars and champagne—who the hell cares?”

At that moment, the opposition’s hopes evaporated. For Trump, there is only one candidate he wants to work with. True, he was pleased when the opposition and the hostages’ families credited him for the deal, but he was not confused. In his eyes, it was Bibi who “did so much to make this possible.” And Trump knows what he’s saying. Just ask Joe Biden, who steadfastly refused to invite Netanyahu to the White House, opposed an assault on Rafah and the assassination of Nasrallah, and did everything possible to prevent an attack on Iran out of fear of a regional war.

Trump himself was hardly enthusiastic about the strike on Iran. Shortly before it, he had practically begged Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to open direct talks, and on the first day of the war, he made sure that his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, clarified that Trump’s “hands were clean.” Then, suddenly, as Trump was praising Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad, Netanyahu bombed Hamas headquarters in Doha, publicly taking full responsibility. Indeed, Bibi is not an easy man. To put it mildly — Trump didn’t like what happened.

Israel’s opposition accused Netanyahu of ordering the strike to sabotage the hostage deal, and yet, after the bombing in Doha, Qatar and Turkey blinked. Netanyahu apologized, and the hostage deal moved forward. When the opposition later claimed that “the same deal could have been reached a year earlier,” Trump once again came to his ally’s defense, declaring at the Knesset: “Suppose those B-2 bombers at the Fordow site had missed, and suppose Iran had large-scale nuclear weapons — we couldn’t be here today, even if we wanted to sign a deal. We couldn’t sign it, because many people wouldn’t want anything to do with it.”

In other words, it was Bibi who paved the way for the deal. As Yedioth Ahronoth columnist Avi Shilon wrote, “The credit for the agreement — which clearly favors Israel and brings about Hamas’s surrender, at least on paper — cannot go only to Trump but also to Netanyahu. Just as he, as prime minister, bears responsibility, though not necessarily blame, for the calamity of October 7, so he also bears responsibility for ending the war with Hamas’s fall and the hostages’ return.”

Given Trump’s speech and Netanyahu’s about-face, the question now is what the opposition has to offer. Continued praise for Trump as the sole architect of the hostage deal only plays into Netanyahu’s hands. Trump has made his choice, while the opposition remains visionless — abandoning its liberal worldview by embracing Trump. Netanyahu’s authoritarian leanings pale next to those of an American president who sends troops into U.S. cities under the pretext of a “war on crime” and puts his political opponents on trial.

To grasp the full significance of Trump’s visit, one must look back six months ago. In mid-May, Trump toured the Gulf states, led by Saudi Arabia, while deliberately skipping Israel — a clear signal that the U.S. now views the Gulf, not Israel, as the hub of its Middle East presence. “Billions or trillions will fall on America like manna from heaven,” he boasted. Turkish President Erdoğan and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman orchestrated a public meeting between Trump and Abu Muhammad al-Julani, the jihadist leader in Damascus — a gesture from the two patrons of Syria’s new Islamist regime. Riyadh then sponsored a UN conference on Palestinian statehood that explicitly excluded Israel, while Erdoğan compared Netanyahu to Hitler. It seemed that the “most pro-Israel president ever” had no qualms about aligning himself with Israel’s bitterest foes — so long as the business interests of the Trump, Kushner, and Witkoff families came first, even before the interests of Israel or the U.S.

As early as March, Steven Witkoff said in a candid interview with far-right, antisemitic host Tucker Carlson: “Hamas is not ideologically committed to suicide; therefore the conflict can be resolved through dialogue.” At the time, I wrote an article titled The Gospel of Witkoff [https://en.daam.org.il/?p=1543], stating: “Since Trump’s first term, the tables have turned. If the original Abraham Accords sought to prove that regional peace could be achieved without solving the Palestinian question, the second-term version asserts that regional peace must pass through it.”

Trump’s Knesset speech thus symbolizes a broader shift in U.S. Middle East policy. If October 7 represented Israel’s weakness and its inability to deter Iran’s coalition, two years later, after the blow dealt to the Iranian regime, the balance has reversed. Trump was forced to make a U-turn and inform his allies across the region that Israel could no longer be bypassed. Not by chance, he ended his Knesset address with these words: “The story of Israel’s determination and victory since October 7 should prove to the entire world that those who seek to destroy this nation are destined to fail. The State of Israel is strong, and it will live and prosper forever. Therefore, Israel will always remain a vital ally of the United States of America.”

While Trump was forced to reconsider, so too was Netanyahu — especially when Trump turned directly to him during the speech and reminded him that “the world is big and strong.” In other words: don’t try to defy the world — it’s bigger and stronger than you. By accepting Trump’s 20-point peace plan, Netanyahu finally abandoned his dream of “voluntary transfer of Palestinians from Gaza,” the annexation of the West Bank, and the illusion of “peace for peace.” In an interview with CBS, he said: “We agreed to give peace a chance.” In practice, that will likely mean parting ways with his far-right allies Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, who voted against the deal.

Given Trump’s speech and Netanyahu’s about-face, the question now is what the opposition has to offer. Continued praise for Trump as the sole architect of the hostage deal only plays into Netanyahu’s hands. Trump has made his choice, while the opposition remains visionless — abandoning its liberal worldview by embracing Trump. Netanyahu’s authoritarian leanings pale next to those of an American president who sends troops into U.S. cities under the pretext of a “war on crime” and puts his political opponents on trial.

Netanyahu’s responsibility for Israel’s military victories over the Iranian coalition does not absolve him of his many failings: he fed Hamas, bears responsibility for October 7, weakened the judiciary, and drove the country toward constitutional crisis — and, above all, he still has no solution for the Palestinian question, Israel’s core strategic problem. But the opposition has no solution either.

I’ll end with a quote from Avi Shilon’s article, which captures the sentiment of many Israelis yearning for change:
“Israel is entering a new era, with enormous potential, ahead of elections that will determine its direction. It’s easy to complain about the political system’s flaws, but the fact that Israel’s main political players remain the same — and that no new, significant party or leader has emerged since October 7 — is also the responsibility of Israeli society. The time has come.”