Eran Yashiv for Haaretz
The Americans have a term – ‘high-maintenance’ – for someone who requires constant attention, care, and support, and in looking at Donald Trump’s incentives with respect to Israel, there are good reasons, related to this colorful term, to think that it is in the interest of the president-elect to remove Benjamin Netanyahu from power. Since Trump is erratic and unpredictable, this is not an exact prediction, but rather an analysis of his position, with economic considerations at the fore.
Primarily there are two reasons for him doing this.
First, Trump sees the prime minister as high-maintenance. Israel has received close to $18 billion in military aid from the United States over the past year. Trump has both expressed and acted on a desire not to spend American taxpayers’ money on foreign conflicts, whether in Ukraine or Israel. Supporting the ongoing Middle Eastern turmoil is not on his agenda.
Second, Trump is eager to reach a deal with Saudi Arabia. Such an agreement would enrich him and his family personally, as was the case with the Abraham Accords. A Saudi condition for this deal would be a pathway toward a Palestinian state, even if that is not their true priority. Netanyahu and his right-wing allies have made opposition to a Palestinian state their rallying cry. The Saudis will demand Netanyahu’s removal.
Does Trump have a commitment to Netanyahu? The answer is a resounding ‘No.’ Trump holds Netanyahu in contempt and resents the prime minister’s ties with U.S. President Joe Biden, and now that he is free from electoral considerations, his campaign promises hold little value.
Remember, Trump cannot be elected to a third term and he might even subvert the U.S. democratic process. Additionally, Trump downplays the antisemitism within his family and in his own behavior. His father’s apartment rental policies in New York were rife with discrimination against Jews.
How would Trump ‘remove’ Netanyahu?
In two ways. First, by sending a message to Israeli parties, especially the ultra-Orthodox parties, that Netanyahu’s ‘career is over.’ They would likely fall in line quickly.
Second, by exerting financial pressure and using a carrot-and-stick approach with Netanyahu, his Likud party and other power brokers. At best, he will ease him out of power.
What are the implications? This move would have varied consequences. On one hand, it would be a major boost to Israeli democracy and security. Netanyahu is directly responsible for the greatest crisis in Israel’s history and will be remembered as a key figure who weakened the Jewish people from within. In the not-so-distant future, ‘to do a Netanyahu’ might become a term for a self-destructing nation. Netanyahu was never a strong leader. He has merely survived the longest in office by making promises, taking credit for things he didn’t achieve (for example, the success of Israel’s tech sector) and dodging accountability for his failures. (Before October 7, he was responsible for inciting the climate that led to Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination).
Over the years, his autocratic aspirations grew stronger, his divisiveness and defamation turned more toxic, his family and close associates became a worse influence and his narcissism turned pathological.
On the other hand, Iran and its allies are attuned to diminishing U.S. support for Israel and see an American leader aligned with Russia’s Vladimir Putin as an advantage. Netanyahu’s successors will face challenging geopolitical conditions. Trump has already inflicted strategic damage by canceling the nuclear agreement with Iran; his future actions could be even more harmful.
Eran Yashiv, a professor of economics at Tel Aviv University, is a former head of the Economics and National Security Program at Tel Aviv’s Institute for National Security Studies.