Two Israeli journalists visited Palm Beach, Fla., with hopes of receiving strong support from Donald J. Trump for Israel’s war in Gaza. Instead, they were alarmed by Mr. Trump’s comments during the interview, which suggested that Israel was losing public support for its Gaza assault, that the images of devastation were damaging Israel’s global image, and that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should end the war soon. These statements were unexpected from a Republican president and sounded more like something President Biden would say.
Mr. Trump’s remarks were interpreted by some as signaling a departure from previous robust support for Israel. While his campaign spokeswoman emphasized that he supports Israel’s right to defend itself, she also stressed the importance of quickly and decisively completing the mission for peace and stability in the region. This nuanced position contrasts with the unwavering support from congressional Republicans who are urging Israel to do whatever is necessary to annihilate Hamas.
The ambiguity in Mr. Trump’s rhetoric about the Israel-Hamas conflict has left different audiences interpreting his statements differently. Trump’s critics suggest that his statements may indicate a wavering commitment to Israel as seen in his first term, where he gave Prime Minister Netanyahu nearly everything he wanted. Concerns have been raised by right-wing supporters of Israel and Israelis like Ariel Kahana that Trump might not be as reliable an ally in a second term.
Mr. Trump’s former ambassadors and advisers have attempted to clarify his statements. They suggest that his comments should be understood as a call for Israel to defeat Hamas decisively and as quickly as possible. Some of his former advisers, like Jared Kushner, have proposed controversial ideas to resolve the conflict, such as moving Palestinians out of Gaza. Additionally, David M. Friedman has developed a plan for Israel to claim full sovereignty over the West Bank, which would effectively end the possibility of a two-state solution.
Despite Mr. Trump’s past insistence on brokering a grand peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians, his actions in office heavily favored Israel. John R. Bolton, a former national security adviser, has criticized Mr. Trump’s position on Israel, suggesting that his support is contingent on what benefits him personally rather than coherent national security strategy. Concerns have been raised that Trump’s support for Israel in a second term may not be as guaranteed as it was in his first term. This uncertainty has prompted analysis and speculation about the future of U.S.-Israel relations under a potential Trump second term.
