In early 2024, when Israel planned a military assault on the densely populated city of Rafah in Gaza, the Biden administration actively intervened. Officials threatened to withhold American weapons unless Israel presented a clear and viable strategy to safeguard civilian lives.
However, the dynamic has shifted dramatically under President Trump’s leadership. As Israel initiated a fierce ground offensive into Gaza City this Tuesday, Mr. Trump has largely remained on the sidelines.
Despite warnings from several major nations about potential civilian casualties and the risk of prolonging the Gaza conflict, Mr. Trump has neither pushed for restraint nor explicitly endorsed Israel’s actions. When questioned outside the White House on Tuesday about his support for the offensive, he stated he hadn’t discussed it with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, adding, “Well, I have to see — I don’t know too much about it.”
Although Mr. Trump has often presented himself as a global peacemaker and has repeatedly called for an end to the nearly two-year-long Gaza war, his current position appears to be one of passive observation as the conflict intensifies.
Given the immense leverage provided by U.S. military aid to Israel, only an American president can truly influence Prime Minister Netanyahu’s actions. In this context, Mr. Trump’s inaction effectively provides the Israeli leader with a free pass.
Daniel C. Kurtzer, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel during the George W. Bush administration, remarked, “Trump clearly wants an end to the war and return of the hostages, but he appears to have neither a strategy nor the willingness to press Netanyahu.” He elaborated, “He threatens Hamas, but those threats are interpreted by Netanyahu as a green light to keep going. Thus, Trump’s diplomacy is working against itself.”
Mr. Kurtzer further suggested, “Notwithstanding this, Trump is better positioned than anyone else to bring the war to an end. But he needs to do more than make public statements.”
Yet, a recent visit to the Middle East by Secretary of State Marco Rubio offered little clarity regarding the specific outcomes Mr. Rubio and Mr. Trump hope to see from Israel.
Before his departure for Israel on Saturday, Mr. Rubio explicitly ruled out any request for Mr. Netanyahu to halt the impending assault on Gaza City. He indicated that the U.S. mission would involve more listening than active intervention.
“We’re not talking about that or anything of that nature. I mean, that certainly won’t be what I’m going to communicate,” Mr. Rubio stated. “We just want to know what comes next.”
On Monday, Mr. Rubio attended a news conference with Mr. Netanyahu, where the Israeli leader vowed to “defeat” Hamas and showed no signs of pursuing peace negotiations. Mr. Rubio offered no public disagreement or concern.
While Mr. Rubio emphasized that Mr. Trump still desires a cease-fire agreement to free the remaining hostages in Gaza, he placed the blame for the war’s continuation on Hamas. He also refrained from echoing the concerns of many Arab and Western governments, who believe the Gaza City operation could jeopardize peace prospects and the lives of the hostages.
On Tuesday, Mr. Rubio reiterated that “time is running out” for a peace deal, sounding like an ultimatum directed at Hamas. He added, “At some point Israel — it’s their war; they’re going to get to decide how they want to proceed, because they’re the ones that were attacked on Oct. 7.”
Earlier this year, Mr. Trump had suggested that Mr. Netanyahu bore some responsibility for the war’s prolongation and expected him to conclude the conflict, even if it meant pressuring the Israeli leader to make concessions to Hamas. In a March interview with an Israeli newspaper, Mr. Trump asserted, “You have to finish up your war. You have to get it done.”
However, as international condemnation of Israel’s actions in Gaza intensifies, Mr. Trump has recently refrained from criticizing Mr. Netanyahu’s strategy. He has even started to imply that a deal with Hamas might not be, or ever was, achievable. “I think they want to die,” he remarked to reporters in July.
Last month, Mr. Trump casually dismissed the idea of Israel fully occupying Gaza, a stance contrary to most Western governments. “I really can’t say. That’s going to be pretty much up to Israel,” he commented.
Mr. Trump might also perceive political risks in challenging Mr. Netanyahu, who is considered an almost heroic figure among many Republicans. The recent accusation of “genocide” in Gaza by Representative Marjorie Taylor-Greene, a close Trump ally, has been an isolated incident rather than the precursor to a wider Republican dissent.
Regarding Gaza, Mr. Trump’s only recent point of divergence with Mr. Netanyahu has been over reports of starving Palestinian children. This prompted Mr. Trump to demand in late July that Israel allow more aid into the territory, rejecting Mr. Netanyahu’s assertions that hunger reports were exaggerated and that Hamas was responsible for food shortages.
Nevertheless, Mr. Trump has remained largely silent on this issue in recent weeks, even as aid organizations continue to report dire shortages of food and medicine.
To evaluate Mr. Rubio’s visit to Israel, it is useful to compare it with the trips made by President Biden’s Secretary of State, Antony J. Blinken.
During his frequent visits, Mr. Blinken routinely challenged Mr. Netanyahu and other Israeli officials on issues such as humanitarian aid and civilian protection. Notably, Mr. Netanyahu consistently avoided holding joint news conferences with Mr. Blinken, unlike his appearance with Mr. Rubio on Monday.
If humanitarian concerns were a priority for Mr. Rubio on Monday, he offered no public indication. Furthermore, Mr. Rubio did not meet with Palestinian Authority officials in Ramallah, West Bank, a contrast to Mr. Blinken’s multiple engagements there.
While Mr. Biden’s efforts to mediate an end to the Gaza war were unsuccessful, he did establish the groundwork for a cease-fire deal that Mr. Trump finalized during the presidential transition in late 2024, a deal Biden officials had hoped would pave the way for a lasting settlement.
Ilan Goldenberg, a Middle East policy expert who served in both the Obama and Biden administrations, commented, “At the start of the Trump Administration there was real hope that he would pick up on the cease-fire that he and Biden negotiated together and use his leverage to end the war in Gaza.”
“Sadly that has not happened. Instead, at every step of the way he’s given Netanyahu a blank check,” added Mr. Goldenberg, who is now a senior vice president at J Street, a liberal Israel advocacy group in Washington.
Mr. Trump’s passive approach to Israel might soon face a new challenge. The United Nations General Assembly is set to hold its annual meeting next week in New York City, where several key U.S. allies — including France, Australia, Canada, and Britain — are expected to recognize a Palestinian state.
Although such a recognition would be largely symbolic, it would deeply anger Israel, prompting threats from right-wing leaders to annex parts of the West Bank. Annexation could also severely damage the relationships Israel has cultivated with several Arab neighbors in recent years, alliances that have held despite the pressures of the Gaza war.
During his first term, Mr. Trump successfully brokered the Abraham Accords, establishing diplomatic ties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan.
Mr. Trump frequently touts the accords as one of his most significant achievements, even if recent events have undermined his earlier claim that they brought “peace” to the Middle East. He had hoped to extend the accords to include more Arab states, with Saudi Arabia being the ultimate goal.
The ongoing war in Gaza has indefinitely postponed this prospect, and it would almost certainly become impossible if Israel proceeds with significant annexation in the West Bank. This scenario may soon compel Mr. Trump to decide whether it is finally time to exert some restraint on the Israeli leader.