January 10, 2025 - 8:30pm
In a surprising turn of events, president-elect Donald Trump recently shared on his Truth Social a video featuring Columbia professor Jeffrey Sachs accusing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of being “a deep, dark son of a bitch” who has led the US into “endless wars” in the Middle East.
In the video, Sachs says that Netanyahu has been the driving force behind the US involvement in several Middle Eastern conflicts — including the war in Iraq, the decade-long attempt at toppling Assad (which ultimately came to fruition last month) and a potential war with Iran in the near future. “He’s gotten us into endless wars and because of the power of all of this in US politics, he’s gotten his way,” Sachs claims.
Netanyahu’s advocacy for the 2003 Iraq invasion is central to Sachs’s critique. In a 2002 speech to Congress, Netanyahu asserted that removing Saddam Hussein would have “enormous positive reverberations” across the region. Instead, the war led to devastating consequences: hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian deaths, thousands of American casualties, trillions in costs and a government in Baghdad more aligned with Tehran than before. The power vacuum also facilitated the rise of extremist groups, including al-Qaeda in Iraq and its successor, the Islamic State (ISIS).
Sachs’s criticisms of US interventionism and Israeli influence have drawn fierce backlash from Israeli officials. Diaspora Minister Amichai Chikli dismissed Sachs as part of a fringe group of “Holocaust deniers, conspiracy theorists and blood libel enthusiasts who oppose the State of Israel”.
Trump’s decision to share this video, just a little over a week away from his inauguration, has left many people scratching their heads. The president-elect, after all, is known for his full-throated support for Israel — and Netanyahu himself — and has stuffed his next administration’s cabinet with pro-Israel figures, from Marco Rubio to Pete Hegseth to Mike Huckabee. It is particularly striking when considering Sachs’s focus, in the video, on the Iraq War and Israel’s role in it, given Trump’s vocal criticism of that conflict — and the fact that most Americans now view it as a mistake.
Could this be Trump’s way of telling Netanyahu that his support for Israel should not be considered unconditional? Might it be a signal or warning to Netanyahu to not overplay his hand when it comes to Iran? Did the two have some fallout behind the scenes? Netanyahu’s decision to officially cancel his plans to attend Trump’s inauguration, without providing an explanation, suggests this might be the case. The decision came shortly after the video was shared, implying a potential correlation.
This wouldn’t be the first time relations between the two leaders have soured: in 2020, Trump was enraged by Netanyahu’s decision to congratulate Joe Biden for his election victory, while Trump was still disputing the result — a move Trump viewed as disloyal.
Of course, this could just be a case of Trump doing what he does best: shuffling the cards and muddying the waters in order to sow panic and confusion among both his friends and adversaries, leaving them in the dark as to what to expect from him. After all, the president-elect has often boasted about how “unpredictable” he is — his personal take on the well-known “madman theory”.
Whatever the case may be, the move raises questions about how his administration will reconcile two seemingly contradictory foreign policy stances: his steadfast support for Israel and his pledge to avoid entangling the United States in further Middle Eastern conflicts, and non-interventionist rhetoric more in general, which enjoys widespread support among his MAGA base. Throughout his presidency, Trump has consistently positioned himself as Israel’s “best friend” — moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, recognising Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and facilitating the Abraham Accords, aimed at normalising relations between Israel and several Arab nations at the expense of the Palestinian question. More recently, he has provided political support for Israel’s assault on Gaza.
From Israel’s perspective, however, unwavering US support for Israel should also encompass greater US involvement in the region’s conflict — a potential sticking point between Trump and Netanyahu. The latter has been vocal, for example, about the need for US assistance in countering Iran’s influence, urging American action against Tehran’s nuclear programme and its regional proxies. Could Trump be signalling to Netanyahu that he won’t tolerate any attempts by his “best friend” to strong-arm him into deeper entanglements on this issue?
For now, his motives remain as enigmatic as ever, leaving both his allies and critics guessing.
Thomas Fazi is an UnHerd columnist and translator. His latest book is The Covid Consensus, co-authored with Toby Green.
battleforeurope
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeIn 2023 Trump criticised Netanyahu, that the day before the planned precision air strike killing of then top Iranian General Suleimani, Netanyahu pulled out his support . Trump said: “I’ll never forget that Bibi let us down”…
Because for all his image in Western media as a beligerant warmonger, Netanyahu’s image at home is political prowess combined with extreme caution to cowardice.
Caution to cowardice? Yes, what’s less cowardly than bombing buildings from drones that obliterate innocent women and children? He’s a psychopath. And the US and UK enablers are too.
Thomas Fazi’s critique, while thought-provoking, misinterprets the broader stakes in America’s unwavering alliance with Israel. Trump, as well as the majority of Americans, understands that the demise of Israel would signify far more than regional instability—it would be a death knell for Western civilisation as we know it. Israel is not merely a geopolitical ally; it is a bulwark of democracy, technological innovation, and cultural resilience in an increasingly unstable region.
Jeffrey Sachs’s assertions about Netanyahu’s influence and Middle Eastern wars are not new but oversimplify a complex web of regional politics. While mistakes such as the Iraq War merit scrutiny, holding Israel solely accountable ignores broader strategic failures by multiple global powers. Trump’s critique of US interventionism does not equate to abandoning Israel. Instead, it reflects his pragmatic approach to securing American interests without unnecessary entanglements, signalling to allies like Netanyahu the importance of measured strategy.
Western civilisation’s survival depends on preserving the strength of its allies, and Trump’s understanding of this balance remains central to his foreign policy vision.
What a load of tripe! What has Israel, a country that has MPs in its Cabinet who praise those who throw rocks at Christian worshippers got to do with the survival of Western civilisation?
This is frankly nonsense. Western civilisation is not at risk at all from the Middle East directly – the threats to it (as more and more Westerners are starting to realise) are generated at home and largely self-inflicted. There is of course an impact from continue conflict and instability in the region creating refugee flows to Europe (but not the US). On balance. Netanyahu is part of the problem here rather than the solution (if there is one).
None of that is to say that the US should not support Israel for economic and cultural reasons and to defend a democratic state. But that doesn’t mean the stakes for the US are anything like as high as you make out.
Back to the article. Fazi essentially outlines the case that Netanyahu has caused more problems for Israeli and regional stability and security. A view I agree with. His inflexible, hard-line approach – which often seems to be driven by his short term survival – is not offering a secure future to anyone in the region.
Few people in that region have a secure future, primarily because it’s been shredded for a millennia by an omnia bellum contra omni.
Of course Israel is a vital bulwark against Islamic domination, and of course Netanyahu is legitimately defending his country. The current conflict stems entirely from Hamas’ psychopathic atrocities against civilians, and led eventually to the fall of Syria’s abbatoir regime.
Losing Israel to a failed state of homicidal Palestinians would be an absolute disaster. Gulf shipping would be immediately threatened, oil would skyrocket in price, further harming the economy, and millions more still of war refugees would need to be resettled. Israel’s industries – software, weaponry, pharmaceuticals, etc al – would vanish, and massive amounts of aid would be required simply to keep Palestinians, any remaining Israelis, and most residents of the Levant from starving.
I doubt Trump is lessening in his support for Israel, though he is perhaps moderating his support for Netanyahu. It is time to wrap up the offensives against Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihadi, Al Queda, and ISIS, and perhaps it’s instead time for America and Israel both to face a more important enemy, namely the Dark Ages theocracy currently in power in Tehran.
This needn’t be an entirely military operation. Most other Middle Eastern countries, some of them American allies, have been on the receiving end of Iran’s mischief and malice. An alliance of Middle Eastern states assembled against the Ayatollahs could ensure better, more peaceful, less draconian regimes in Tehran and Baghdad both.
That would be a far more effective settlement than, as much of the left suggests, simply telling the Israelis to “go back to Europe.”
Israel is an ethnosupremacist state and is no more a “bulwark” against Islam than apartheid South Africa was a “bulwark” against sub-Saharan Africans. The big difference of course is that the White South Africans weren’t genocidal maniacs. And Western foreign policy hadn’t been hijacked by their rabid supporters.
Virtually all the West’s recent meddlings in MENA have been at the behest of Israel, and they’ve been a disaster for the average Westerner and the indigenous Arabs alike.
What was the prompt for writing this comment?
Although I am pro-Israel, your comment is moot. The prompt for Stunned K1W1 was an order from his boss in the Israeli Embassy, Mossad or the Office of Mr. Netanyahu. All is fair in love and war. Stunned’s only mistake was timing. It would have slipped through were it second or third in the main comments. Nonetheless every word of Stunned’s comment is true and British Labour better remember it too.
Netanyahu would like Trump but doesn’t need him to continue the genocide. The Jewish Lobby’s control in the White House, Wall Street, Media, Hollywood, Banking & Finance, and big corporations pull the strings. The genocide will continue.
People have been throwing the genocide slur at Israel for the last 50 years. Israel must be doing a totally useless job of this genocide business, since they could blow the 7 mile wide Gaza strip to total smithereens in one weekend if they wished.
Liam, this is an oft repeated bogus argument. Of course they couldn’t completely nuke the strip – even though many of their cabinet have more or less called for it. The global pushback would be, even for them, too much. So, they do it slowly. Destroy all infrastructure and make it uninhabitable and hope the Palestinians will leave.
You don’t want to call it genocide? Fine. But destroying water and sewage services, hospitals, universities and other amenities is better called what exactly?
This is astounding, but I think Trump will soon contradict himself. How does the Kushner family fit into this story? They desire shorefront property in the Gaza strip. Does Tulsi Gabbert replace Rubio as Secretary of State?