Israel’s influence on the US and the US’s dilemmas

Israel’s genocidal Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated in an interview with the US media, “The war with Iran is not over. Enrichment facilities must be dismantled, and highly enriched uranium must be eliminated.” He claimed that the permanent elimination of Tehran’s nuclear capacity is mandatory.

The landscape in the Middle East is as follows: The US is both trying to make Israel more effective, stronger, and larger in terms of territory, and is attacking countries that make Israel uneasy or oppose its influence. It divides, fragments, destabilizes, and occupies these countries. It is particularly important to evaluate what is happening in Libya, Iraq, and Syria, as well as the US-Israeli aggression toward Iran, from this perspective, among other dimensions.

We know that Israel has significant influence over the US. The effects and reflections of this influence are also seen in the US’s relations with Turkey. Israel influences the US to such an extent that the US loves whom Israel loves and dislikes whom Israel dislikes. US presidents are hesitant to take steps in the Middle East without asking for Israel’s opinion or obtaining its approval. Therefore, it is noteworthy that in recent months, many experts, politicians, and commentators in the US have been saying regarding the attacks on Iran, “This is not America’s war; it is Israel’s war. It is wrong for the US to be so guided by Israel and to follow in its footsteps.” For the first time, Israel is being criticized so openly and loudly in the US. The endless, limitless support the US provides to Israel is being questioned like never before.

DIMENSIONS OF ISRAEL’S HOSTILITY TOWARD TURKEY

Israel’s influence on the US, as seen in the US-Israeli aggression toward Iran, has also been evident in ceasefire negotiations. Israel has done everything in its power to prevent the US from accepting a ceasefire. Even though Pakistan managed to get both the US and Iran to agree to a ceasefire across the region, Israel immediately pressured the US and excluded Lebanon from the scope of the ceasefire.

Israel’s hostile stance toward Turkey is also noteworthy. By supporting terrorist organizations against Turkey, Israel aims to force Turkey to mobilize its energy and resources by fighting these terrorist organizations both domestically and in its immediate vicinity. In this context, the most functional and useful card in Israel’s hand is the PKK terrorist organization. The US also supports the PKK terrorist organization. Therefore, the US-Israeli duo jointly backs structures that are extensions of the PKK terrorist organization, such as the PYD-YPG in Syria and PJAK in Iran. As will be recalled, in 2017, Israel also supported the independence referendum led by the Barzanis in the regional administration in northern Iraq. It announced that if a decision for independence were made following the referendum, it would be among the first countries to recognize the independent Kurdish state that would break away from Iraq.

THE US ECONOMY IS NOT DOING WELL

The US is also forced to fight, attack, gain new customers for its arms industry, and receive new orders from an economic perspective. This is because the US economy is dependent on war. The military-industrial structure holds a special, important, and priority position among the country’s dominant, locomotive sectors. The US public debt is over 39 trillion dollars. The private sector debt (including households) reaches 42 trillion dollars. The budget deficit approached 1.8 trillion dollars in 2025. Last year, the foreign trade deficit reached 901.5 billion dollars. There is also an economy that is regressing in terms of production and competitiveness.

By attacking Iran together with Israel, the US aimed not only to neutralize Iran’s missile capacity and nuclear capability but also to change the regime in Iran, and if possible, even its borders. It dealt heavy blows to Iran and caused much damage, but it could not force a surrender. It failed to achieve its military or political goals.

Another calculation of the US was to open a significant gap in China’s energy supply by striking Iran, which sells 90 percent of the oil it produces to China. China receives nearly half of the oil it consumes from countries in the Persian Gulf, such as Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. In total, 45 percent of the oil it uses reaches China by passing through the Strait of Hormuz. It should be noted that the Strait of Hormuz is also important for other major Asian economies such as Japan, India, and South Korea, in addition to China. It is also necessary not to forget the close relations these three countries have with the US.

WHILE ATTACKING IRAN, THE US ALSO WANTED TO WEAKEN CHINA, BUT FAILED

While calculating that Iran would be weakened, the US also thought about battering China. It failed. This failure made the US even more aggressive and caused it to panic more. Because no matter what it does, the process is working in China’s favor.

For example, in 1990, China’s share of the world economy was 1.8 percent. Today, it is 18.5 percent. In other words, over the past 36 years, China’s share of the global economy has increased 10-fold. While the US’s share was 34 percent in 1985, it fell to 26 percent in 1990. Today, it has declined to 22 percent. As can be seen, the US’s share is steadily declining. The decline in Europe, on the other side of the Atlantic, is faster than the decline of the US. The European Union’s share of the global economy in 1990 was over 27 percent. Today, its share is 17 percent. In other words, over the past 36 years, the European Union has declined by 10 percent.

This decline in Europe inevitably fuels debates within the European Union, just as it reduces the appeal of the European Union. It even emboldens those who want to leave the European Union. After the British left the European Union with Brexit in the 2016 referendum, similar debates have increased even more in Europe. Those who advocate for France to leave the European Union use the term “Frexit,” and those who advocate for Sweden to leave use “Swexit.”

Debates about leaving are, of course, not only taking place in the European Union. Similar debates are also taking place in NATO, in parallel with US President Trump’s belittling of NATO members and even his suggestion that the US could leave NATO. For example, Slovenia, one of the small-scale members of NATO, is discussing taking the issue of leaving NATO to a referendum. Undoubtedly, this is a bold and ambitious debate for a small-scale country.

Ultimately, this is what is seen: Because the US is weakening, the cracks in the Atlantic alliance are deepening, and the debates within major Western organizations such as NATO and the European Union are intensifying. The attacks of the US-Israeli duo on Iran and Iran’s resistance make these cracks even more visible.