Clashing interests determine fragility of U.S.-Israel alliance

Editor's note: CGTN's First Voice provides instant commentary on breaking stories. The column clarifies emerging issues and better defines the news agenda, offering a Chinese perspective on the latest global events.

Touting unwavering support to its first non-NATO "ally," the White House issued rare outright condemnation against the Israeli government's military operations in the Middle East. "We deplore today's attack on the UN's Khan Younis training center," U.S. State Department spokesperson Vedant Patel said on Wednesday.

As U.S. President Joe Biden cautioned Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to "repeat mistakes" Washington made after the 9/11 attacks, Tel Aviv, as a "loyal" U.S. ally, has insisted on ramping up assaults in Gaza amid a mounting death toll. The White House is "frustrated by Israel's onslaught," reads a headline from The Washington Post.

Divergences of interests over the Gaza conflict determine the fragility of the U.S.-Israel "strong" alliance.

Who will rule Gaza?

Washington's and Tel Aviv's incompatible answers to the ultimate question of "Who will rule Gaza" are at the core of divergences.

Netanyahu has, on several occasions, refused any Palestinian sovereignty in post-war Gaza, stressing that Israel will have "overall security responsibility" in the region for an "indefinite period."

To prevent a two-state solution, Tel Aviv has taken a slew of measures to disengage from peace talks – including funding Hamas. "Hamas was financed by the Israeli government in an attempt to weaken the Palestinian authority," the EU's top diplomat Josep Borrell made in an explosive claim last week. After all, for the Israeli government, "having no partner" would be the best excuse to prevent appearing at the negotiating table.

But the October 7 attacks manifest it as a losing bet. In this context, there are growing signs indicating that Netanyahu, after decades of fighting, prefers a final showdown with Palestine. Israel must fight until it achieves "complete victory," said Netanyahu.

But this is not the future Washington is happy to see in Gaza.

The U.S. has long maintained that a two-state solution, which could create an independent Israel and Palestine, is the only feasible way to lasting peace in the region.

In the wake of the new round of escalation of tensions in Gaza, an overwhelming majority of U.S. Democrats (49 out of 51) backed a statement supporting a two-state solution on Wednesday. "What will determine the future of Israel and Palestine is whether or not there's hope. And the two-state solution has to be that hope," said U.S. Senator Brian Schatz.

A protracted war?

For a "complete and absolute" victory, the Israeli government envisages a protracted war. "The objectives of the war require prolonged fighting, and we are preparing accordingly," Israeli military spokesperson Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari was quoted as saying by CBS News.

But a protracted war is imperiling U.S. interests. Admittedly, the U.S. deployed warships to the Red Sea and sent weapons to Israel, but it does not mean the White House is happy to see the fighting prolonged. The longer the conflicts last, the more the U.S. loses.

As a result of the Israel-Palestine fighting, the U.S.'s influence among Arab countries has reached its lowest point in history, while support for China, Russia and Iran – which Washington has long regarded as strategic opponents – has increased, according to polls conducted by the independent research group IIACSS in 2023. Only 7 percent of Arabs in the region believe the U.S. has played a positive role in Gaza, while the figure for China is above 20 percent.

Regional countries have been urging for an immediate end to the conflicts. A protracted war is seen by many as a testament to Washington's limited capability in mediation. The longer the war, the less likely the U.S. could restore its influence in the region, let alone expand it.

In addition, prolonged conflicts in Gaza have put Washington's geopolitical plans – for instance, the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) – at risk of stalling. "World's most ambitious trade route stalls in Mideast turmoil," a Bloomberg headline reads.

While the Israeli military is preparing for a protracted war, the overarching U.S. interests remain the prevention of an escalation of the turmoil.

Growing affinity toward Palestinians?

For the Israeli government, Palestine is a major enemy. But views toward the Palestinians are shifting within U.S. society.

According to Gallup polls in 2023, Democrats' sympathies in the Middle East lie more with the Palestinians than the Israelis, 49 percent versus 38 percent. While Democrats' affinity toward Palestinians saw an 11-percentage-point increase, the percentages sympathizing more with the Israelis dipped to new lows. In the meantime, U.S. political independents' affinity toward the Palestinians is at a new high.

This means the Biden administration's unwavering support for Israel is under increasing domestic pressure. As Biden is gearing up for the 2024 presidential election, he cannot afford losing the Muslim votes. For rivals, Israel's bombing in Gaza could be an easy card to play in criticizing the Biden administration's foreign policies.

Against this backdrop, Biden needs a peaceful solution to Gaza conflicts and thus a cooperative Israeli partner. But apparently, this is not the case at this point.

With close historical and economic ties, Washington and Tel Aviv have been bragging about their strong alliance. But divergences of interests determine the fragility of their alliance: In case of clashing interests, neither is willing to sacrifice for their "closest ally."

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter (now ‘X’) to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)