According to President Donald Trump, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visits the White House on 7 July, the two leaders will have much to celebrate — not just a successful military campaign against Iran but also a possible ceasefire in Israel’s war in Gaza. Even Trump’s ally-turned-nemesis Elon Musk seemed impressed with Trump’s string of wins, posting on X: “Credit where credit is due. @realDonaldTrump has successfully resolved several serious conflicts around the world”.

The reality, however, does not live up to the hype. The Trump administration believes the US strike on Iran “has set the conditions for global stability” and opened new opportunities for political realignment in the Middle East, including in Gaza. But any pause in the region’s overlapping wars will be tenuous and almost certainly temporary. Worse, when hostilities resume, the risk of the United States being dragged back into the fighting is high. Washington should use the current respite to begin disengaging from the region completely and avoid future entanglement.

Trump and his national security team believe the Israeli military campaign and the US airstrikes on Iran achieved their objectives. The US President claimed the United States had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear facilities. He expressed confidence that Iran will return to the negotiating table chastened and ready to make a long-term deal that shutters its nuclear programme. Netanyahu has been equally triumphant. “We sent Iran’s nuclear programme down the drain,” he proclaimed.

Outside experts have been more circumspect, noting that it is too soon to tell how much damage Iran’s nuclear capabilities have sustained. More worrisome, the location of Iran’s highly-enriched uranium stockpile is unknown and the status of its centrifuge components unclear. Iran likely still has the building blocks to reconstitute its nuclear programme and has announced that it will halt cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Moreover, the country’s leaders have many reasons to push forward with their effort to get a usable nuclear capability as the only true safeguard for regime survival.

Washington and Jerusalem have already warned that such a move will provoke a military response. Netanyahu especially, who desires not just the end of Iran’s nuclear programme but the demise of its political regime, may have a low bar for resuming military operations and will certainly try to drag the United States in after him, having been successful before. This would be disastrous for the United States, as a regime change war would be protracted and likely require US ground forces.

The situation in Gaza is no less of a quagmire for the United States. Trump wants a permanent end to Israel’s war in Gaza, while Netanyahu refuses to stop military operations until Hamas is eliminated, a goal that is not achievable using force alone. Though Israel has acquiesced to temporary ceasefires in the past, this has been a stalling technique, designed to string Washington along before resuming the war with greater ferocity.

Netanyahu’s acceptance of the latest proposed temporary ceasefire — under consideration but not agreed to by Hamas — is simply more of the same. It is unlikely to mark an end to Israel’s military operations in Gaza or signal a readiness to talk about a long-term solution for the territory’s security. Rather, Netanyahu will use the cessation of hostilities to consolidate his position, recover some hostages, and win points with Trump before restarting his campaign. In the meantime, the United States may replenish Israel’s arsenal, further draining US stockpiles, and offer renewed diplomatic and political cover, eroding US credibility abroad.

Trump should not let himself fall prey to Netanyahu’s games yet again. Instead, he should use the current moment to reposition the United States so that it is protected from involvement in future Middle Eastern wars, no matter how events in the region evolve.

First, Trump must set boundaries with Netanyahu, making it clear that regime change in Iran is not a US goal and that Washington expects a permanent end to fighting in Gaza. Removing the US air and naval power that surged to the region in recent weeks would be a strong signal to Israel that Washington will not participate in future military action. Restricting offensive US military aid would similarly show that there are limits to US support, including in Gaza.

Washington should also withdraw forces most vulnerable to attacks from remaining Iranian proxy groups, including in Iraq and Syria, to reduce the potential for unintended entanglement. Finally, the United States should abandon efforts to build “a new Middle East,” including by expanding the Abraham Accords. Building a new regional order is a job for the countries that reside in the Middle East, not the United States, whose track record in this regard is poor.

The United States has been trying to get out of the Middle East for decades. Trump has an opportunity now to actually do it. What a legacy that would be.

---

Jennifer Kavanagh is a senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities.

jekavanagh

---