The Complex Dynamics of US-Israel Relations: Military Operations, Aid, and Political Factors
Introduction
The recent escalation of Israeli military operations in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria has raised significant questions about the international response, the political pressures facing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the concept of “Greater Israel,” and the nature of US support for Israel.
The article examines these interconnected issues by comprehensively analyzing current events, historical context, and political dynamics.
International Response to Israeli Military Operations in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria
Israeli military operations have intensified across multiple fronts. In Gaza, Israel resumed ground operations in central and southern regions in March 2025 after ending a ceasefire that had been in place since January.
This offensive has seen Israeli forces move into the Shaboura district of Rafah and Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza, with Defense Minister Israel Katz threatening to annex territory and apply “all military and civilian pressure,” including relocating Gaza’s population southward.
The international community has responded with varying degrees of opposition and support.
Russia and China have issued strong condemnations, with Russia’s UN Representative Vassily Nebenzia calling Israel’s actions in Lebanon “a terrorist attack” that “jeopardizes regional peace and security.”
China similarly condemned Israeli operations as showing “a complete disregard for human life.”
Western nations initially supported Israel’s right to self-defense following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks, but positions have evolved as the conflict continued.
France, for instance, initially expressed “full solidarity” with Israel but later called for a ceasefire, with President Macron stating that “fighting terrorism did not mean flattening Gaza.”
Germany similarly offered military aid to Israel but later expressed opposition to “collective punishment.”
The United Nations has highlighted the severe humanitarian impact, reporting that since October 7, 2023, and as of March 17, 2025, the Gaza Ministry of Health has recorded at least 48,577 Palestinian deaths and 112,041 injuries.
The UN estimates that approximately 70-80% of these casualties are civilians, with women and children making up a significant portion of the verified fatalities.
Netanyahu’s Political Landscape and Domestic Pressures
Benjamin Netanyahu leads a coalition government that holds 68 of the 120 seats in the Israeli Parliament, providing relative stability despite significant domestic challenges.
His coalition includes far-right elements like Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party and Bezalel Smotrich’s Religious Zionism party, both of whom have expressed opposition to ceasefire arrangements and favor more aggressive action in Gaza.
Despite historically low approval ratings and ongoing corruption trials, Netanyahu’s political position remains relatively secure.
Analysts say, “Netanyahu and his government are unpopular, but their hold on power is secure.” The ongoing conflict has, in some ways, strengthened his coalition by cementing support from far-right parties that form his base.
The January 2025 ceasefire agreement created tensions within the coalition, with Ben-Gvir indicating a willingness to leave the government over the deal.
However, experts suggested this was unlikely to lead to the government’s collapse. Dr. Ilana Shpaizman of Bar-Ilan University noted: “Smotrich and Ben-Gvir both understand that this ceasefire has two phases. The pressure on the government will likely lead to phase two, which means withdrawing all IDF soldiers from Gaza and ending the war”.
The Concept of “Greater Israel” and Its Influence
The term “Greater Israel” has multiple interpretations with significant implications for understanding Israeli policies. Its broadest biblical definition refers to land “from the brook of Egypt to the Euphrates,” encompassing parts of modern-day Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq.
In contemporary Israeli discourse, however, the term more commonly refers to extending Israeli sovereignty to the West Bank (biblically referred to as Judea and Samaria), the Golan Heights, and territories acquired since 1948.
The concept has deep historical roots in Zionist thought. Theodore Herzl, founder of modern Zionism, envisioned a Jewish homeland encompassing “most of modern Israel but extending to such northern Lebanese cities as Sidon and Tyre and such Golan Heights towns as Quneitra.”
Netanyahu’s ideological foundations are connected to Revisionist Zionism, founded by Ze’ev Jabotinsky. This movement emphasizes “territorial maximalism and peace through strength.”
This ideology views Jewish control over historic Palestine as a right and necessity, influencing Netanyahu’s approach to territorial issues and security concerns.
US Military and Financial Support to Israel
The United States has provided unprecedented levels of military and financial support to Israel, particularly since October 2023. According to a report from Brown University’s Costs of War project, the US has spent at least $17.9 billion on military aid to Israel since the war in Gaza began.
This represents the most significant amount of military aid sent to Israel in a year, significantly exceeding the annual $3.8 billion established under the Obama administration’s 10-year Memorandum of Understanding.
Recent aid packages include
$8.7 billion in September 2024, including $3.5 billion for wartime procurement and $5.2 billion for air defense systems
$14.3 billion in emergency military assistance and $9.2 billion for humanitarian aid approved in April 2024
A proposed $8 billion arms sale in January 2025
$4 billion in fast-tracked military aid authorized using emergency powers in March 2025
The military equipment provided includes a wide range of weapons systems:
2,166 GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bombs
13,000+ JDAM guidance kits for bombs
2,800 MK 82 500-pound bombs
32,000 tank cartridges and 50,000 mortar cartridges
F-15 and F-35 aircraft
Since 1959, Israel has received approximately $251.2 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars, making it the largest recipient of US military aid in history.
Factors Shaping US Support for Israel
A complex interplay of historical, strategic, and domestic political factors shapes US support for Israel.
The relationship’s origins date back to the Cold War era, when Israel’s anti-communist stance became strategically valuable as Arab states aligned with the Soviet bloc.
A thesis from Union College notes: “The origins of the American affiliation with Israel derive from Israel’s commitment to anti-communism following Arab alignment and arms cooperation with the Soviet block in the 1950s”.
Domestic political factors play a significant role in maintaining this support. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) exercises considerable influence in American politics, with one historian claiming AIPAC “essentially controls Congress” with a 90% success rate in supporting pro-Israel candidates.
According to political scientist Walter Hixson, “All the members of the House or Senate know that if they criticize Israel, they will be targeted with multimillion-dollar campaigns for their opponent.”
This domestic political dynamic creates constraints on US leverage over Israel. As political scientist Stephen Walt notes: “The main reason past U.S. presidents had less leverage than one might suppose was the power of the Israel lobby, which made it politically risky to threaten meaningful reductions in U.S. support.”
When President Gerald Ford attempted to reassess the US-Israel relationship in 1975, he “promptly received a letter signed by 75 senators denouncing his move”.
Evolution of US Presidential Approaches
US presidents have faced significant constraints in their ability to pressure Israel. President Biden initially provided full support after the October 7 Hamas attack but gradually became more critical of Israel’s methods.
In May 2024, Biden explicitly threatened to halt weapons shipments if Israel invaded Rafah, stating: “I made it clear that if they go into Rafah – they haven’t gone in Rafah yet – if they go into Rafah, I’m not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities.”
Despite these threats, Biden faced political challenges in implementing significant policy changes.
According to Walt, even as the crisis in Gaza damaged “America’s image around the world and made the Biden administration look both heartless and ineffectual,” the political costs of applying genuine pressure remained high.
The Trump administration similarly maintained strong support for Israel, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio signing a declaration in 2025 to fast-track approximately $4 billion in military aid using emergency authority.
Constraints on US Leverage and Policy Options
Despite providing massive financial and military support, the US faces significant constraints in its ability to influence Israeli policy. Walt argues that “weaker states often refuse to comply with U.S. demands, and, sometimes, they get away with it.”
Israel, while dependent on US support, has its security imperatives and domestic political calculations that can lead it to resist US pressure on issues it considers vital.
The balance of resolve also affects US leverage, with Israel often having higher stakes in regional conflicts than the US.
As Walt notes, “I am not suggesting that the United States cares more about the situation in Gaza than Israel does—whatever happens in Israel/Palestine is obviously of greater importance to Israelis (and Palestinians) than to those of us who live in comparative safety in the United States.”
The Humanitarian Impact and International Concerns
The ongoing conflict has created a severe humanitarian crisis. According to the Gaza Health Ministry, at least 48,577 Palestinians have been killed and 112,041 injured as of March 17, 2025.
A peer-reviewed analysis published in The Lancet estimated that trauma-related deaths were likely underestimated by 41%, suggesting the actual toll may exceed 70,000.
The UN has reported that on March 18, 2025, alone, 404 people were killed and 562 injured in Israeli airstrikes and bombardment.
The humanitarian situation is dire, with severe shortages of medical supplies, blood, and equipment. Since March 2, 2025, “the entry of all humanitarian supplies, alongside any other cargo, into Gaza has been halted by the Israeli authorities.”
Conclusion
The US-Israeli relationship is shaped by a complex interplay of historical ties, strategic considerations, domestic political factors, and divergent priorities.
While the US provides unprecedented levels of military and financial support to Israel, its ability to influence Israeli policy is constrained by domestic political dynamics and Israel’s security imperatives.
The international community’s response to Israel’s military operations reflects differing strategic interests and values, with Western nations increasingly divided in their approach. Netanyahu’s government, despite domestic challenges, maintains stability through coalition politics, with the ongoing conflict sometimes strengthening his position with key supporters.
Understanding these dynamics requires recognizing the multiple factors, from the historical evolution of the US-Israel relationship to the complex regional security environment and the significant humanitarian impact of continued conflict.
As military operations continue across multiple fronts, these tensions and trade-offs will likely remain central to international debate and policy considerations.
