ANALYSIS: Netanyahu, the ally Trump Can No Longer Control

Expansion as a Doctrine

What Netanyahu calls “security” increasingly resembles what international law calls permanent occupation. Military operations in Gaza have long since gone beyond the scope of a response to the October 7 attacks. The systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure—hospitals, universities, water systems, bakeries—is not a matter of military tactics. It is part of a strategy of displacement.

The plan is clear to anyone willing to open their eyes. Make Gaza uninhabitable. Force an exodus. Then present the establishment of Israeli settlements as a logical solution for an “abandoned” territory. Israeli ministers have said this openly. Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir—Netanyahu’s coalition partners—no longer even hide it.

The human cost of one man’s ambition

More than 45,000 Palestinians killed, according to figures from the Gaza Ministry of Health. Tens of thousands of children. Entire neighborhoods reduced to fields of rubble where even stray dogs can no longer find anything to survive on. And in the midst of this disaster, a man in Jerusalem is crunching his popularity poll numbers.

This isn’t politics. It’s a cynical mechanism where every life lost is a data point in an algorithm for personal survival. And yet, Western capitals continue to use the word “ally” to describe a government whose two key ministers have been sanctioned by the United States itself for inciting violence.

When the dead are counted in the tens of thousands and the person responsible sleeps peacefully in his official residence, the problem is no longer a military one—it is a moral one, and it concerns us all.

The Extremists Who Hold the Reins

To understand Netanyahu, one must understand his coalition. It is the most right-wing in Israel’s history. Smotrich, the finance minister, openly advocates for the annexation of the West Bank. Ben Gvir, the minister of national security, has been convicted of incitement to racism and support for a terrorist organization under Israeli law itself.

These men are not Netanyahu’s allies in the traditional sense. They are his political captors. If they leave the coalition, the government falls. If the government falls, Netanyahu loses his de facto immunity. If he loses his immunity, his corruption trials resume in full force.

The Vicious Cycle of Radicalization

Every day, Netanyahu must up the ante to satisfy his base. More settlements. More military operations. More bellicose rhetoric. Fewer compromises. Peace is not merely undesirable for this coalition—it is an existential threat. A ceasefire agreement would mean the end of the security pretext that keeps the edifice standing.

It’s a mechanism that any historian recognizes: the leader cornered by his own extremist alliances, who can no longer moderate his stance without collapsing; who can no longer negotiate without betraying his base; who can no longer stop without dying politically. And yet, Trump continues to believe that a single phone call will be enough to change this structural equation.

Netanyahu is not a leader who chooses war—he is a leader whom war has chosen, because war has become the only framework capable of supporting the weight of his accumulated lies.

When a Local Conflict Becomes Regional by Design

The Israeli offensive was not limited to Gaza. Lebanon was struck. Syria was bombed. Provocations against Iran have multiplied. And with each escalation, Netanyahu gets what he wants: the impossibility of returning to the negotiating table.

The more the conflict spreads, the more unmanageable it becomes diplomatically. The more unmanageable it becomes, the more Netanyahu can say: “See? Peace is impossible. You have to keep me in power.” It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy of formidable effectiveness. Create chaos. Then present yourself as the only one capable of managing it.

Iran, the Perfect Pretext

The Iranian threat is real. No one disputes that. But Netanyahu uses it as a permanent wild card—a card he plays every time the conversation drifts toward Gaza, toward the settlements, toward violations of international law. “Yes, but Iran…” has become the Pavlovian reflex of Israeli diplomacy.

And Trump, obsessed with Iran since his first term, takes the bait every time. That is Netanyahu’s tactical genius: he knows his interlocutor’s obsessions better than the interlocutor knows them himself. He knows that mentioning Iran’s nuclear program makes people forget the children buried under the rubble in Rafah.

The Middle East is ablaze with five simultaneous fires, and the man holding the matches calmly explains that he is a firefighter—the only problem is that no one has cut off his supply of matches yet.

The Most Intimate Betrayal

This is perhaps the most shocking aspect of this whole affair. The families of the Israeli hostages—the families who protest every week in Tel Aviv, who plead, who scream—accuse Netanyahu of sabotaging the agreements that could bring their loved ones home alive.

It is not Palestinian activists who are saying this. It is Israeli parents. Mothers. Fathers. Brothers and sisters who haven’t slept in months. And their verdict is final: Netanyahu would rather keep his coalition together than save Israeli citizens.

Cynicism as the Art of Governing

Every time an agreement takes shape, a new condition emerges. A new demand. A new pretext. American and Qatari negotiators have seen this happen time and again. A ceasefire agreement is within reach—and then suddenly, it isn’t. And no one can prove that Netanyahu has torpedoed the negotiations, because the sabotage happens behind the scenes, in the technical details, in the “last-minute clarifications.”

It’s sabotage in velvet gloves. The diplomacy of smiles and a knife in the back. And with each passing day, the chances of finding the hostages alive diminish.

When a prime minister sacrifices his own captive citizens on the altar of his political survival, he has crossed a line that even the most cynical realpolitik cannot justify.

The Diplomatic Frankenstein’s Monster

The United States didn’t just support Netanyahu. It made him possible. Decade after decade, veto after veto in the UN Security Council, billions upon billions in military aid—Washington has built an ally that is accountable to no one.

The result is a client state that has spiraled out of control. Israel uses American weapons to carry out operations that America officially disapproves of but unofficially funds. This is the very definition of strategic schizophrenia: publicly condemning what one privately finances.

The Lobby and the Political Lock

Trump—like Biden, and like Obama before them—is up against a structural reality of American politics. Support for Israel is not a foreign policy issue. It is a domestic policy issue. AIPAC and its sister organizations pour hundreds of millions of dollars into election campaigns. For an elected U.S. official, criticizing Netanyahu means risking a heavily funded opponent in the next primaries.

This dynamic locks the system in place. Even when a president wants to exert pressure, Congress neutralizes it. Even when the State Department recommends sanctions, the White House backs down. And Netanyahu watches it all from Jerusalem with the satisfied smile of a poker player who knows everyone’s cards.

America has forged the chains that prevent it from acting—and now it is discovering that the key lies in the hands of the very person it claims to control.

Press Release Diplomacy

While Washington hesitates and Tel Aviv moves forward, Europe issues press releases. “Concerns.” “Calls for calm.” Statements that have as much impact as a dead leaf in a hurricane.

France, Germany, the United Kingdom—all these powers that boast of their commitment to international law—watch Gaza burn with the powerlessness they themselves have brought about. No sanctions. No arms embargo. No coordinated and simultaneous recognition of the Palestinian state that could be a game-changer.

The weight of history as a permanent excuse

Germany does not criticize Israel because of the Holocaust. France is caught between its Jewish and Muslim communities. The United Kingdom is protecting its arms contracts. Everyone has their excuse. Everyone has their reason for doing nothing. And meanwhile, international law—that European invention of which Europe is so proud—is being methodically trampled underfoot by a government that Europe continues to treat as a respectable partner.

The International Court of Justice has issued an advisory opinion. The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants. And European leaders are looking the other way, just as one looks away from a highway accident—with a mixture of fascination and cowardice.

Europe invented human rights, then it invented exceptions to human rights—and Netanyahu has become the most spectacular exception in the history of multilateralism.

The Architecture of a Shaky Agreement

Trump had presented the Abraham Accords as his diplomatic masterpiece. Normalization between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. Bahrain. Morocco. Sudan. Handshakes. Photos. Self-proclaimed Nobel Peace Prize laureates.

The fundamental problem? These agreements sidestepped the Palestinian issue rather than resolving it. They normalized relations between governments that were not at war, while ignoring the people who have been living under occupation since 1967. It’s like turning off the lights in a room where there’s a fire and proclaiming that the fire is out.

Saudi Arabia, the Ultimate Prize—and the Missing Key

The missing jewel of the Abraham Accords is Saudi Arabia. Riyadh has set a clear condition: no normalization without concrete progress toward a Palestinian state. And that is precisely what Netanyahu categorically refuses to accept.

Trump wants the Saudi deal as a diplomatic trophy. Netanyahu wants U.S. support without Palestinian concessions. These two ambitions are structurally incompatible. And as long as Netanyahu remains in power with his current coalition, they will remain so.

The Abraham Accords were a house of cards built on sand—beautiful to look at, impossible to live in, and the first breath of Palestinian reality shook them to their hollow foundations.

When Institutions Exist but Take No Action

The ICJ has declared the occupation illegal. The ICC has issued arrest warrants against Israeli leaders. UN resolutions pile up like fallen leaves in an empty hallway. And nothing changes.

It’s not that international law is weak. It’s that it’s applied selectively. When Russia invades Ukraine, sanctions are imposed within forty-eight hours. When Israel bombs Gaza, there are “calls for restraint.” This asymmetry in treatment is no accident. It’s a system. And Netanyahu exploits it with a mastery that commands respect—and disgust.

The Dangerous Precedent

What is happening in Gaza goes beyond Gaza. If a state can ignore the International Court of Justice, ICC warrants, and dozens of UN resolutions with impunity, then international law is officially dead. And every autocrat on the planet is taking note.

Xi Jinping is watching. Putin is observing. Erdoğan is calculating. The message is clear: if you’re an ally of Washington, international law is optional. It’s a blank check for impunity—and Netanyahu is cashing it in real time, before the eyes of the entire world.

Every resolution ignored, every mandate unfulfilled, every sanction unenforced not only destroys justice for the Palestinians—it destroys the very idea that a rules-based world order is possible.

The Internal Divide the World Doesn’t See

Israel is not a monolithic bloc united behind Netanyahu. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis protested against the judicial reform before October 7. Reservists refused to serve. Intelligence officers publicly criticized the strategy in Gaza.

These voices exist. They are courageous. They are also systematically ignored by Western media, which prefer the simplistic narrative of an Israel united behind its wartime leader. The reality is infinitely more complex: a deeply divided society, where families no longer speak to one another, where friends of thirty years have drifted apart over the issue of Gaza.

Shin Bet Veterans Sound the Alarm

When former directors of the Shin Bet—Israel’s internal security service—declare that Netanyahu’s policy endangers the country’s security, this is not pacifist rhetoric. These are men who have spent their lives protecting Israel through means most people would rather not know about. And their assessment is unanimous: Netanyahu is sacrificing long-term security for short-term political gains.

True Israeli patriots are not those who cheer every bomb—they are those who have the courage to say that today’s bomb creates tomorrow’s enemy.

Demographics: The Invisible Clock

Between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, Palestinians are already in the majority. This is a demographic fact that no amount of military power in the world can change. Every year that passes without a two-state solution makes that solution more unworkable. And every settlement built drives another nail into the coffin of partition.

Netanyahu knows this. His advisors know this. That is precisely why they are accelerating settlement expansion. The goal is to create facts on the ground so massive that turning back becomes physically impossible. And every month of war in Gaza provides the perfect smokescreen to advance these plans without the world reacting.

Wear and tear as a weapon

Netanyahu is banking on the world’s fatigue. On the weariness of public opinion. On the next scandal that will divert attention. On the normalization of horror—that moment when death tolls cease to shock, when images of destruction become background noise, when Gaza joins the list of tragedies the world has decided to turn a blind eye to.

And this gamble is paying off. Already, protests are becoming fewer and farther between. Already, newspaper front pages are moving on to other stories. Already, normalization is underway.

Time is the occupiers’ weapon of choice—not because it solves problems, but because it numbs those who could solve them.

The Leverage That Exists

The tools are there. Make military aid conditional on a settlement freeze. Recognize the State of Palestine. Support the ICC’s mandates instead of sabotaging them. Impose targeted sanctions against extremist ministers in the Netanyahu coalition. Each of these measures is legally feasible, diplomatically justifiable, and strategically rational.

None will be taken.

The invisible wall of U.S. domestic politics

Because Trump is a prisoner of the same system as all his predecessors. American evangelicals—his most loyal electoral base—view support for Israel as a theological imperative. Pro-Israel donors fund entire campaigns. And any candidate who dared to make aid to Israel conditional would find themselves facing a political war machine capable of destroying careers in a matter of weeks.

Trump, the man who claims to be accountable to no one, is accountable to that very lobby. And Netanyahu knows this better than anyone.

The tragedy of U.S. policy in the Middle East is not the lack of solutions—it is the abundance of solutions that no one has the political courage to implement.

Five million people whose names no one mentions

Amid this chess game between Trump and Netanyahu, between Washington and Jerusalem, between the Abraham Accords and electoral calculations, an entire people is treated as a variable to be adjusted. The Palestinians are not consulted. They are not represented. They are not even named in most diplomatic communiqués except as a “problem” to be solved.

Two million people in Gaza live in what the United Nations has described as “inhuman” conditions. Children are born in makeshift tents, grow up amid bombardments, and die before they’ve learned to write their own names. And the international community debates whether the word “genocide” is appropriate.

Dehumanization as a Prerequisite for Indifference

One can only ignore the suffering of a people if one has first ceased to see them as a people. This is the result of decades of sanitized diplomatic language, asymmetrical media coverage, and systematic propaganda. When an Israeli child is kidnapped, the world knows his first name. When a thousand Palestinian children are killed, they become a statistic.

This asymmetry of empathy is not natural. It is constructed. And Netanyahu is one of its most skillful architects.

The absence of Palestinians from conversations about their own future is not an oversight—it is a strategy, and it has been working for so long that we have come to mistake it for normality.

What the history books will say in fifty years

Future historians will look back on this period with the same dismay with which we today view the West’s hesitation in the face of other tragedies of the 20th century. How was it possible that the world knew—in real time, with satellite images, videos, and eyewitness accounts—and did nothing?

Netanyahu will be judged. Not only by the courts, if they ever function. But by history. And history does not forgive men who have sacrificed entire peoples to remain in power for one more year.

But Trump, too, will be judged

And the verdict may be even harsher. Because Netanyahu, at least, acts according to an understandable logic of survival—however monstrous it may be. Trump, on the other hand, had the power to stop him. He had the tools. He had the opportunity. And he chose to look the other way so as not to upset an ally who openly manipulates him.

History reserves its harshest judgments not for the perpetrators, but for the bystanders who had the power to intervene and chose inaction.

Fifty years from now, when the archives are opened and memoirs are published, one question will resurface like a haunting refrain: They knew—why didn’t they do anything?

Signed, Jacques PJ Provost