Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's position is weakening in the upcoming elections. US President Donald Trump's reluctance to openly support Netanyahu so far has raised questions about deepening political differences between the two leaders.
Modern.az reports that “Axios” published this information.
According to the information, two weeks ago, when Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump met in the Oval Office, the US President asked the Israeli Prime Minister about his ratings ahead of the elections to be held on October 27.
Netanyahu hesitated to answer. After that, one of his advisors intervened and said, “Mr. President, he is winning.”
However, polls do not show Netanyahu currently winning. Trump, despite being repeatedly questioned by journalists about this, has not yet given the open support the Israeli Prime Minister expected. The US President may change his position later. But there are only 75 days left until the elections, and Netanyahu's time is rapidly running out.
According to polls, Netanyahu's current coalition could win 49-53 seats. This is significantly less than the 68 seats the coalition currently holds and the 61 seats required to form a government.
Opposition parties, on the other hand, could secure 67-70 seats. Netanyahu's main rival, former Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces Gadi Eisenkot, also enjoys higher public support in most polls.
However, it is not essential for Netanyahu to win outright. His main goal is to gather enough votes to prevent his rivals from forming a government without the support of Arab-Israeli parties.
If this happens and neither side can form a coalition government, Netanyahu could continue to serve as prime minister for several months until new elections are held. Currently, this scenario seems realistic.
In the first weeks of the war with Iran, some of Trump's close advisors were confident that he would support Netanyahu. At that time, Trump openly supported the issuance of a pardon that would halt Netanyahu's corruption trial.
However, as the war dragged on, Trump's and Netanyahu's foreign policy goals and domestic political interests began to diverge.
Over the past three months, serious disagreements have arisen between the two leaders not only on the issue of Iran, but also regarding Lebanon and Gaza.
According to two senior US officials, while Trump welcomed Netanyahu in terms of personal relations, he is disappointed with his decisions and policies. According to them, Trump said about the Israeli Prime Minister, “Bibi is his own worst enemy.”
The latest incident that further complicated relations between the two leaders was Netanyahu's explicit refusal to support Trump's Gaza peace plan, which envisioned the disarmament of Hamas.
A senior US official stated that the White House views Netanyahu's statement on Sunday not as an official policy statement, but as part of the election campaign.
The US official said:
“We understand Bibi's political needs. We have no problem with that, provided that he continues to meet our demands, especially regarding the prevention of strikes on the Gaza Strip.”
Last week, Netanyahu had a phone conversation with Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, promising to give the peace plan a chance despite his doubts. He also committed to limiting strikes on Gaza to initiate the demilitarization process.
According to a US official, after that, Israel carried out significantly fewer strikes on Gaza than before, and the Israel Defense Forces withdrew to the “Yellow Line” where they were supposed to stop according to the agreement.
According to four sources, Jared Kushner plans to visit Israel next week to discuss the Gaza plan with Netanyahu and other officials.
A number of Netanyahu's political rivals, including Gadi Eisenkot, as well as former prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, are concerned that Trump will support the current Prime Minister.
Opposition representatives sent informal messages to Trump and his entourage through common friends, sponsors, and other political allies, urging him to maintain a neutral stance.
A former US official briefed on the situation stated that Netanyahu's weak position in the polls has deterred Trump from direct intervention.
Trump enjoyed great popularity in Israel. However, over the past three months, due to the agreement with Iran and his decision to de-escalate after its violation, Trump's influence in the country has weakened.
Israelis are also dissatisfied with the restrictions Trump has imposed on Israel's military operations in Iran, Gaza, Syria, and Lebanon.
In recent weeks, journalists have asked Trump four times whether he would support Netanyahu. Each time, he avoided giving a direct answer.
In July, radio host Hugh Hewitt asked Trump, “Is there anyone better for that position in Israel than him?”
The US President did not answer the question directly, saying, “I don't know, I don't know most of them. Of course, I know some, but not most.”
In several of his recent interviews, Trump referred to Netanyahu as a “great wartime prime minister.” However, it is noteworthy that each time he spoke about Netanyahu in the past tense.
Although Israeli officials stated that Trump discussed the pardon issue with Netanyahu privately during recent meetings, the US President has not spoken openly about it for several months.
The elections in Israel are crucial for Trump's Middle East agenda during his remaining two years in office. This issue becomes even more relevant especially against the backdrop of the Iran crisis remaining in a “neither agreement nor war” situation.
Trump also intends to advance the Gaza peace plan, achieve results in Israel-Lebanon negotiations, conclude a security agreement between Israel and Syria, and most importantly, achieve a historic peace agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Trump and his team also recall the political crisis in Israel in 2019. That crisis led to three consecutive elections and caused diplomatic efforts in the Middle East to halt for a year.
A senior US official stated that the White House will not repeat previous mistakes and will not allow Israel's internal politics to hinder the implementation of the regional agenda.
