Afrasianet - Wissam Ismail - The current American reality is incompetent to perpetuate a unilateral approach to international issues, as evidenced by Russian boldness in Eastern Europe and China's push to expand in the world.
Some may argue that the supposed dispute over the management of regional files between US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is the beginning of a rift that will undermine the relationship between two strategic allies that have long been able to impose their pace on the reality of regional balances in the region.
Some approach this idea as the result of the failure of the Zionist lobbies in the United States to subjugate the current American administration and plan its directions. Thus, according to them, this assumption may lead to the possibility of the United States abandoning the Israeli entity, at least in the face of files around which the visions diverge between the two parties.
In this context, it is supposed to be noted that the relationship between the Israeli entity and the American administrations concerned with strategizing and making foreign decisions is not characterized by a balance that may sometimes be defined as sometimes tilting in favor of this entity at the expense of American interests. Thus, this relationship can be described as part of the Israeli entity's quest to align these strategies with its interests and strategic interests and orientations.
By reading the post-Cold War reality, it can be seen that this entity benefited from the trend of American unilateralism, which was based on the exploitation of hard and soft power tools in the process of achieving the great hegemony of American interests and values. Zionism in the United States that there was an opportunity to try to achieve the entity's expansionist projects and consolidate its security and military superiority under the cover of possessing the necessary capacity and competence to implement American plans, benefiting at the same time from an American conviction that assumes that it is considered a solid pillar that effectively helps ensure the stability of the region and oil supplies of vital importance to the United States.
Accordingly, it can be concluded that the current reality of the formally fluctuating relationship between the current US administration and the Netanyahu government constitutes an exception to what has been historically recognized between them, as the current US administration considers, at least theoretically, that the path that Netanyahu adheres to in his administration of the reality of the regional entity does not correspond to the requirements of the stage known to the United States as requiring the adoption of the path of deepening relations and meeting the allied Arab countries in a flexible manner in parallel with the attempt to impose the American vision and path with the opposing forces in a negotiated manner. and dialogue.
The current American reality lacks the competence that was able to devote a unilateral approach in dealing with international issues, as evidenced by Russian boldness in Eastern Europe and the Chinese push to expand in the world without forgetting the slogan "America First", with what this slogan means of an inevitable confrontation with the historical allies of the United States, who found that the American project abandoned the option of Americanizing global values and political and economic integration and adhered to the option of Americanizing global interests, and therefore will not suit the Israeli path of hegemony under the slogan Greater Israel, as this project entails the involvement of the United States of America with its hard and absolute power.
Based on this reading, it is supposed to be noted that the limits of this dispute do not exceed the framework of disagreement on the working tools necessary to achieve the project agreed upon between the two parties, as Israeli superiority in the region as a sacred goal for all Israeli governments, past, current and future, does not contradict the American approach, but the current American path can be considered a pave for it, albeit by means different from those that Netanyahu wants. The American vision of the path of normalization, in addition to the reality of the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian Authority, without neglecting the goal The final American negotiations with the Islamic Republic and the reality on which the United States is working in both Lebanon and Syria do not depart from the framework of the final vision of Greater Israel.
Although the Israeli-Saudi normalization file is not linked to any of the US conditions that were previously imposed on Saudi Arabia, such as building a Saudi nuclear program or signing a defense strategic agreement with the Kingdom, Donald Trump touched on this file, i.e. normalization, as a vital need for the region and its stability, and linked it directly to any openness to Syria, with reference to the symbolism of Syria and the conflicts for influence on its territory, without forgetting that he dealt with the statement of the Saudi foreign minister after the Gulf summit. The American on the need to stop the aggression on Gaza in a way that does not suggest the possibility of exerting real pressure on Netanyahu, but tried to define the framework for talking about Gaza only by allowing the entry of aid and food to it.
In general, Donald Trump was able to achieve success in his tour of the Gulf region by separating files and not allowing them to be linked to each other, as he relied on his experience in making trade deals and dropped his experience as a businessman on the path of relations with the Gulf countries. He described it as subversive, in parallel with his ability to transform the file of the war of extermination on Gaza and the two-state solution demanded by the Arab countries as an entry point for normalization into a secondary file that is supposed to be dealt with in a way that does not actually affect Netanyahu's orientation or the position of the Israeli entity in the regional system and the American strategic doctrine.
In the initial result of what Donald Trump was able to obtain from his current Gulf tour, it can be said that he guaranteed to obtain investments that may easily exceed $ 3 trillion, in addition to ensuring that the Gulf countries, in addition to Syria, line up behind him in a strategic project entitled American leadership in the region and the Americanization of interests and investments in it without providing a return for that from the account of the Israeli entity and Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump's embarrassment to Netanyahu, through a ceasefire with Yemen or the release of prisoner Idan Alexander Or lifting the embargo on Syria or the negotiations led by Whitkov with him, will not affect the strategic position of the entity in the region or its relationship with the United States, but can be defined as an American insistence on adapting the region and the Israeli entity to serve American and Israeli interests in the long term, based on the postulates governing the relationship between the entity and the United States, which can be defined by an American vision that considers the presence of a strong entity in the region is a vital need that cannot be jumped over. It is only supposed to redefine or program its power to serve the American goal behind it.
Therefore, it can be said that this supposed dispute between Netanyahu and Trump is nothing more than a tactical disagreement between two leaderships that cannot be relied upon or given more value than what can be considered an interim American necessity that will serve the United States and Israel in the medium and long term.