The nature of the dispute between Trump and Netanyahu‎ ‎By Walid Abd El, Hai‎ – Translated from Arabic by Ibrahim Ebeid.July 30/2026

The nature of the dispute between Trump and Netanyahu‎

‎By Walid Abd El, Hai‎ –

Translated from Arabic by Ibrahim Ebeid.July 30/2026

‎In political decision theory, there is a distinction between two stages: the first is decision-making (which is the presentation of the various alternatives to the decision and the evaluation of the results of each alternative), and the second is decision-making stage (which is the selection of one of the alternatives based on the golden rule, which is the greatest possible gain or the least possible loss).‎

‎The Arab political literature must recognize that the differences between Trump and Netanyahu lie not in their agreed-upon strategy. They agree on the goals but disagree on the mechanisms and timing for implementing the decision. Perhaps the circumstances of their respective governments sometimes require some disagreement.‎

‎It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that Trump has made a series of dangerous strategic decisions that all US presidents have been “avoiding”, “postponing”, or “taking unclear positions”, and it is enough to stop at the following of Trump’s decisions:‎

‎ 1- His recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel in December 2017‎

‎2- The relocation of the US embassy to Jerusalem in May 2018‎

‎3. Withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran in 2018‎

‎4- Closure of the PLO office in Washington in 2018‎

‎5- Declaring that settlements in the West Bank are not in violation of international law in 2019‎

‎6- Recognition of Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights and annexation of it in 2019‎

‎7. Announcement of the Deal of the Century 2020‎

‎8- The conclusion of the Abraham Accords between Arab countries and Israel in 2020‎

‎9. Suspension of funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (preliminary decision in 2018 and executive decision in 2025)‎

‎10- Lifting the sanctions imposed by Biden on some settlers by 2025‎

‎11- Israel’s participation in large-scale attacks on the axis of resistance (Iran and Yemen) 2025‎

‎12. Orders to tighten measures against anti-Semitism in U.S. universities by 2025‎

‎13- Selecting ambassadors and envoys for the topics of the Palestinian issue who are known for their full support for Israel in 2025‎

‎14- Pressure on Arab countries, especially the Gulf countries, to disarm all factions of the axis of resistance, and to try to arrange for the normalization of relations between Lebanon and Israel.‎

‎The 14 precedents adopted and practiced by Trump are at the core of the Zionist project, and to an extent that goes beyond the limits of any previous American president’s support, as it goes beyond Truman, Nixon, Reagan, and Bush in its strategic alignment with Israel.‎

‎It is noteworthy that Trump and his political team (in the first term of his presidency and the current one) have the least relationship with the oil companies, which makes him less considerate of the lowest demands of the Arab oil countries, and gives him a wider space to act with them and employ their capabilities without any reservation, and even makes him more clear in his demands, as we see these days in linking the relationship with Saudi Arabia in the field of nuclear cooperation by joining the Abraham Accords.‎

‎Based on the above, Trump, with his excessive narcissism, wants to remain the master of the strategic position in the region, as he does not differ with Netanyahu in the goal at all. Still, rather than the disagreement over who leads the implementation of the plan and its priorities, it seems to me that Netanyahu’s sense of security is superior to Trump’s. Trump’s narcissistic tendencies are superior to Netanyahu’s.‎

‎If Trump and Vance view the Israeli role as the chief officer of the ship and not as its captain, Israel sees the supreme value as determined by Israel’s security concerns and the liquidation of its opponents. In contrast, the US Secretary of Defense Hegsey sees the matter from an unambiguous “crusader” perspective; they all agree on the goal. If there is a disagreement, it is on the priorities of the stages. Implementation and its ideological and practical justifications.‎

‎It is noteworthy that the Arab media, especially in Al Jazeera, are attempts to blow up the tactical divergence between Trump and Netanyahu and turn it into a strategic dispute, which is part of the mechanisms of blinding the Arab mind, as what Trump has done is what future studies call a “paradigm shift”, and some researchers even called it a “break” with the controls of the US policy towards Israel, and even all the issues of the final solution in which Trump decided to fully respond to all of Israel’s demands.‎

‎Camouflage in Trump’s policies is a tactic followed by many politicians. Still, the misfortune is that we are presented as a “neutral, law-abiding” party by a media trained to camouflage itself by allowing only cosmetic criticism. It is enough to return to academic studies, such as:‎

‎-Tine Ustad Figenschou, who measures structural bias through the selection of sources and elites ‎

‎-Toni Rouhana- who reveals ideological bias by quantitative measurement ‎

‎All of this does not prevent … Maybe.‎