Tuesday, June 16th 2026
The new strategy does not rely on convincing voters, but on strengthening legal, military and economic ties that make it difficult to change the political course.
Israel’s position in American politics is changing significantly. Polls show that more and more Americans oppose unconditional US support for Israel’s actions in Gaza and the region, while many politicians are avoiding close ties to pro-Israel lobby groups.
According to expert Mitchell Plitnick, this new political climate is prompting Israel’s supporters to seek other ways to maintain its influence in Washington.
In an analysis published by Middle East Eye, he argues that despite changing public opinion, Israel’s allies are trying to strengthen the US-Israel relationship through legislation and institutional structures that will make it more difficult to change American policy in the future.
One of the existing bases of this relationship is the American law that requires the preservation of Israel’s “qualitative military advantage”. This principle obliges the US to ensure that Israel remains militarily superior to any potential adversary in the region.
This is intended to create a long-term commitment that limits the freedom of US presidents to change policy towards Israel. So new measures are currently being proposed to be inserted into two key US laws: the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the Intelligence Authorization Act (IAA).
These laws fund US military and intelligence programs and are usually passed each year, making them convenient vehicles for adding other provisions.
One of the proposals would create a special structure responsible for integrating defense and security cooperation between the US and Israel across all federal agencies.
It would also encourage the use of Israeli technology in major US defense projects and expand the sharing of sensitive technologies between the two countries.
Plitnick estimates that such a move would create deep institutional ties that would be difficult to undo, even if American public opinion demanded a distancing from Israel.
In addition, Israel could argue that, because of these agreements, its exclusion from American strategic planning would be against the law.
Another proposal is related to the sharing of intelligence information. It would expand data sharing not only with Israel, but also with Arab or Muslim countries that normalize relations with it through the Abraham Accords.
The US president would be able to limit the sharing of information only in special cases when there is a clear national security concern and would have to justify this to Congress.
Critics argue that this would treat US intelligence as a means of rewarding countries that approach Israel, while Israel would enjoy much broader and less restrictive access than other partners.
Another part of the strategy aims to transform the way military cooperation between the two countries is financed. In the face of growing public opposition to direct US aid to Israel, the idea of partnerships between US and Israeli technology and defense industry companies is being promoted.
Instead of presenting the funds as aid to Israel, they would be presented as investments that create jobs and spur innovation in the US.
According to Middle East Eye’s analysis, the new strategy relies not only on legislation, but also on economic and industrial partnerships that can survive despite political changes in Washington.
Over time, these ties would make it even more difficult to change the course of US-Israel relations.
Mitchell Plitnicki argues that all these measures have a common objective: ensuring the continuity of American support for Israel in the military, technological and intelligence fields, despite changes in public opinion.
According to him, the US-Israel relationship already rests on decades of laws, agreements and corporate partnerships, while the new proposals aim to make it even more entrenched and harder to change in the future. And it poses a challenge to democratic principles because it limits the influence of American citizens on policies that are funded by their taxes. square
Source: prizrenpost
Etiketa: Brief
