His return to the White House is a good message for and a bad message for Iran’s axis, points out in “Vima” the Eitan Samirdirector of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and former head of the strategic doctrine division in the Israeli prime minister’s office.
Professor Samir estimates that much will depend on the freedom of movement that Trump will give Israel vis-à-vis him.
What does Trump’s second term mean for Israel and the Middle East?
“On the one hand, Trump pledged during the campaign that he would not start wars anywhere in the world and that he would end wars there. We saw that in his first term he supported diplomacy in the Middle East, he wants to be remembered as a deal maker, and I think that will be his approach. On the other hand, Trump does not trust the Iranians at all, they are firmly opposed to any form of radical Islamic aggression, and I believe he will strongly support Israel.
The question is how much freedom of movement it will give Israel against Iran. We are seeing an escalation and the question is whether he will allow Israel to go all the way and possibly attack the nuclear facilities, as is the current dynamic, or whether he will attempt to contain Israel and achieve some sort of settlement.
But you remembered that he overturned the nuclear deal, so he’s not looking for a diplomatic solution with Iran. On the other hand, Trump understands that escalation means an eventual attack by Iran against Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. They are also worried and exerting pressure.
It is a very problematic situation for him, in relation to what he desires and reality. He has pledged to support Israel and provide it with the support it needs.
The Biden administration supported Israel’s defensive capability, but Trump could also support the offensive posture, thereby enhancing deterrence.
Some of Israel’s enemies, such as Iran and Hezbollah, may have called off the fire and turned to some sort of settlement that they now reject. I think Trump’s presence is a good message for Israel and a bad message for the Iranian axis.”
What will be the immediate effects?
“Trump will need some time to see what happens, for the next two months Biden will rule. The question is what the other sides will do in the meantime. Israel will continue operations in Gaza and Lebanon as planned. With Iran everything is open, it will largely depend on the Iranian response (to the Israeli bombing of October 26) and its outcome. If the result is severe, it may be a ‘blank check’ for Israel to attack Iran’s economic infrastructure and nuclear program.”
In this new environment, what is the future of Israel-Greece bilateral relations and what are the implications for Israel’s relations with Turkey?
“I don’t think governments directly influence relationships, which are defined by shared values and shared interests. Turkey will continue under Erdogan – possibly in equally extremist or less extreme versions – to show hostility towards Israel, certainly as long as the conflict with the Palestinians in Gaza continues. With Greece, relations of mutual strategic interest will be maintained, the development of know-how exchanges and cooperation in the military, energy and other sectors and of course in tourism, especially from Israel to Greece, which strengthens the ties between the two peoples” .
On the night of the US election, Netanyahu removed Yoav Galland as defense minister. Was it a premeditated move? Does it signal a change in strategy amid the multi-front war?
“Netanyahu wanted to fire Gallant for a long time. The letter was written on the computer for almost a year. He wanted to do it other times, but it wasn’t the right time. Gallant challenged Netanyahu, he had the power and popularity in the defense ministry to do so.
Netanyahu wanted to remove him in order to gain more control over everything, especially now that the ruling coalition has to vote for certain exemptions (from military service) for ultra-Orthodox Jews, who are threatening to bring down the government otherwise.
Netanyahu wants to secure his government for the next two years until elections. Gallant stood in his way because he declared that he would not support it, while some MPs said that they would follow his example, so Netanyahu decided to fire him. There is no change in strategy.
Netanyahu will continue his strategy. Gallant occasionally pressed Netanyahu for different moves, perhaps for more concessions on the release of the hostages or how the war would end. Netanyahu will continue to implement his ideas and plans for war as he has done so far.”
How close is an annexation of the West Bank by Israel? Is the ban on UNRWA (the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees) a step in that direction?
“I don’t see Israel going to annex the West Bank. It would be a very dramatic step. I don’t think Netanyahu, who is a pragmatist, will do that.
It is something that the US would not support even under a Trump presidency, at least under the current circumstances. I don’t think that will happen, but it is not connected to UNRWA, which is a problematic organization.
UNRWA perpetuates the myth of the third, fourth generation refugee, while in the field of education it maintains the enmity towards all Israelis. Its employees were involved in the October 7 massacre. Israel said “enough of this”, decided to ban her and not cooperate with her. The question is what will replace it, but is there a UN agency for the world’s refugees or can a new agency be created.
However, the matter is not at all connected with ideas for the annexation of the West Bank. Most Palestinians in the West Bank are not refugees, 80% of them are under the control of the Palestinian Authority, their daily lives are not defined by UNRWA.
I would say they have a decent standard of living compared to other parts of the world. In Gaza, UNRWA’s role was different, more essential, but not positive for the resolution of the conflict, quite the opposite.”
