Mohammad Ali Hassannia, expert in West Asia affairs
The 1956 Suez War marked a turning point for the US entry into West Asia and North Africa. After Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser – with Soviet support – moved to nationalize the Suez Canal to counter British and French influence in the Middle East, a war broke out involving the two superpowers of the time with the participation of the Zionist regime, whose aftermath led to a new order in the region.
Nasser decided to nationalize the Suez Canal following the Arab defeats against Israel in 1948, seeking to demonstrate Arab superiority and block Paris and London's regional influence. This move nearly ended his rule in Cairo, but suddenly both the Soviet Union and America intervened, and issued an ultimatum to London to stop the war. This very decision brought Washington into the region. However, this entry had its own requirements. Understanding global conditions, the US government based its approach to the power vacuum in the Persian Gulf on two principles: First, the potential threat to Western interests; and second, the inability to directly intervene as a replacement force under the Nixon Doctrine. Accordingly, as whispers of British withdrawal began to spread, America emphasized regional cooperation. In 1968, the then Director-General of the Arabian Peninsula Office in the US State Department's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs stated at a Middle East conference: "Local leaders must and will be able to replace Britain after its historical role ends. America will continue to assist them as much as possible, but we cannot speak of any special role for America in Gulf affairs." In the next step, under the Johnson Doctrine, the US began direct intervention in West Asia. Until then, the Zionist regime had benefited from heavy military support from France and Britain, and needed to make a new choice for the modern era. The founders of the fabricated Israeli regime always believed that this regime – fundamentally based on force – must be connected to a major power for security. Johnson understood this, and the subsequent US presidents prioritized this strategy. Nixon later pursued the "Two Pillars" policy, seeking to enhance Israel's regional role alongside Pahlavi Iran.
America's second major decision to create a proxy force in the region relates to the 1967 war. French President de Gaulle no longer wanted to support Israel, and Tel Aviv realized it needed to turn to another power. Washington had also decided to fill the power vacuum left by the declining British and French empires in the Middle East. This strategy continued when Eisenhower assumed the presidency. The Eisenhower Doctrine, derived from the Johnson Doctrine, had its own approach to confronting communism. An example was the 1957 US announcement that it would distribute economic and military aid and use force if necessary to expel communism. In securing the Middle East, Eisenhower continued his doctrine in 1957-58 by sending funds to Jordan and the pro-Western Lebanese government. This doctrine could only be realized if America could transfer the security of Middle East to a proxy regime or government. Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel were Washington's options, with this policy intensifying from 1967 onward. After the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979, this role was delegated to Israel. One example of American generosity to Israel is the $318 billion in military aid provided to Tel Aviv from 1948 to present.
Another key US doctrine to establish Israel as its regional power symbol was normalization with Arab countries. The Camp David Accords were Washington's first move in this field, followed by Trump's "Deal of the Century" – aiming to both militarily elevate Israel in the region and smooth its political and security normalization path. The trend of US aid since the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation shows that America prioritizes its own interests over Israel's security. In reality, Washington has designed its doctrine to require a proxy regime in the region – effectively turning it into the region's gendarme. This is evident in Trump administration's aid to Israel during both his terms.
Why is Israel viewed as US regional proxy?
- The order America seeks in West Asia after the Soviet collapse cannot be achieved alone through direct Washington intervention.
- Israel is America's only strategic ally worldwide and in the region that will remain committed to the US foreign policy principles under any circumstances.
- For America's security and arms plans to proceed properly in the region, Israel serves as a proxy to restrain Arab countries, with Washington consistently playing the card of Arab fear of Israel. This is clearly manifested in statistics of the US arms sales to Arab countries including:
In February 2025, Trump proposed that the US take control of Gaza to oversee reconstruction
In January 2025, Trump authorized shipment of 1,800 MK-84 bombs (2,000 lbs each) to Israel, lifting previous administration restrictions over civilian casualty concerns in densely populated areas like Gaza.
On February 7, 2025, the US approved massive sale of guided munitions, bombs and related equipment to Israel.
On February 28, 2025, Trump administration approved $3 billion arms sale to Israel including thousands of bombs and warheads, while signing an executive order imposing sanctions on ICC officials investigating the US and allies including Israel. These sanctions target individuals who assist in investigations involving US citizens or allies of the United States.
On January 20, 2025, Trump signed EO 14169 imposing 90-day freeze on all the US foreign aid programs, with military aid to Israel and Egypt exempted.
Trump appointed pro-Israel politicians to key positions in his second administration including Marco Rubio as Secretary of State, Pete Hegseth as Defense Secretary, and Mike Huckabee Sanders as Ambassador to Israel.
On his first day back in office, Trump revoked EO 14115 that had sanctioned violent Israeli settlers in West Bank, welcomed by Israeli officials like Finance Minister Smotrich who called the sanctions “unfair foreign interference”.
- The foundations of US foreign policy are based on dominating not only West Asia, but the entire world. This region holds the largest oil and gas reserves globally, and the entire global economic infrastructure remains dependent on fossil fuels. Under current conditions, safeguarding the economic security of Arab states and Israel is critical for the United States. In the emerging world order, countries like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar are increasingly looking toward China and Russia — a trend starkly evident in the multibillion-dollar agreements between Gulf states and Beijing.
These points recall Biden's famous statements in 1986 and 2023: "If Israel didn't exist, America would have to invent one to protect its interests in the region." Consequently, the US support continues not just diplomatically and politically through UNSC vetoes on Gaza ceasefire resolutions, but also through ongoing financial and military aid.
(The views expressed in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Khamenei.ir.)
Comment