Afrasianet - Useful Sahn - Israel derives its power and influence on the international scene from the power and influence of the Zionist lobby spread around the world, especially when it is penetrating the bowels of the decision-making process in the dominant state of the international system. 

The relationship between the United States and Israel constitutes a unique pattern that is unparalleled in the history of international relations, and this is confirmed by many evidence, including:

1-  The extent of the American assistance Israel receives in various fields. Admittedly, there is no other country in the world that is comparable to Israel's U.S. aid.

2-  The types and quantities of American weapons that flow annually to Israel, it is recognized that Israel can obtain weapons systems from the United States that even NATO member states cannot obtain.

3- The number of times the US veto is used in favor of Israel. It is recognized that Israel is the country in the whole world to benefit from the US veto in the Security Council, despite being the world's most violating international law and committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, which makes it completely immune from condemnation and punishment. 

It is difficult to reduce the specificity of US-Israeli relations to the extent of the American support Israel receives in various fields.

The United States was and still is ready and ready to intervene directly on behalf of Israel, whether to save it from a possible defeat, as it did in the '73 war when it decided to establish an air bridge to provide it with all the weapons it needs, after it became clear that the balance of war is tilted against its interest, or to help it face an imminent danger, as it did in the aftermath of the "Al-Aqsa flood", when it rushed to mobilize its forces and fleets in the region to deter hostile forces. Despite all that the United States offers Israel, no The pattern of the relationship between the two countries always takes the form of a master-blacksmith relationship, or a relationship followed by a follower. Despite its extreme smallness, at least in size and population, Israel often seems to lead and direct the foreign policy of the world's most powerful country. 

This example is often used by proponents of the "functional theory" to assert that Israel is merely a tool of the dominant state of the international system. However, this view overlooks that the most decisive factor in pushing the US president to pressure Israel in this case is due to the growing influence of the Arab movement in that period, and the belief of the American decision-maker that this current is capable of threatening American interests in the future, and therefore has become a force whose interests must be taken into account in The most appropriate at this point is for the United States to work to contain it.

The second fact is that the successive administrations that ruled the United States of America since the '67 war have all sided in favor  of Israel, which leads some to believe that the growing power and influence of the "Zionist lobby" on the American decision-making process explains this bias. However, this view ignores another fact, which is the growing awareness of the American decision-maker of the importance of the role played by Israel in serving American interests and strategies in the Middle East after the 1967 war.

The results of this war did not allow Israel alone to achieve its interests by enabling it to occupy vast Palestinian and Arab lands, but at the same time weakened the influence of the Soviet Union in the region, a goal that the United States sought to achieve.

Therefore, it can be said that the most decisive factor here was the exposure of the true size of the pan-Arab movement and the decline in its ability to influence regional and international interactions, which left a vacuum for the Zionist influence to fill.

We conclude from the above that the balance of conflicting forces in the Middle East, and therefore the extent to which these forces are able to negatively or positively affect American interests in the region, ultimately control the determination of the US position on these conflicts.

It is true that the latter has huge and intertwined interests in the Arab world, but the American decision-maker believes that these interests are guaranteed and realized in all cases, and therefore, do not require a change in his positions and biases, but believes that they can be better achieved by feeding the Arab regimes' sense of fear of Israel, which pushes them to make more concessions to the United States!

However, this situation began to change after the withdrawal of the Arab regimes from the arena of military confrontation with Israel, and the entry of the axis of resistance led by Iran as a direct party in this confrontation. Especially after the "Al-Aqsa flood".

The events that have taken place in the region since that day have proven that Israel has become a great material and moral burden on the United States, which may explain Trump's decision to enter into a negotiating process with Iran on the latter's terms, that is, through indirect negotiations, limited to discussing the nuclear program item in exchange for the lifting of sanctions, and does not address any other items, especially those related to Iran's missile program or its regional influence.

No one can predict the outcome of the ongoing negotiations, but they are certainly a tough test for a man who arrived at the White House with the slogan "America First."

If Trump really wants to ensure that Iran's nuclear program does not turn into a nuclear weapons program, in exchange for lifting sanctions on Iran and enabling it to continue its peaceful nuclear program, it is clear that this is possible and in the interests of the United States and Iran, but it does not necessarily serve the interest of Netanyahu, who seeks to deprive Iran, not only of its nuclear program, even if it is peaceful, but also of its missile program and its regional and regional influence at the same time. So the coming weeks will prove whether Trump pursues U.S. interests or Israeli interests first, and only then, we may find a clear answer to the question of who employs whom?