Polls indicate he is not alone in this sentiment, with most Israelis favouring Trump’s return. A recent survey by Israel's Channel 12 revealed that 66 percent of Israelis prefer Trump, while only 17 percent support Harris. This preference largely stems from Trump’s policies during his first term, which significantly bolstered Israel’s position, including the following:

1. On 6 December 2017, Trump’s administration officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. This marked a radical shift in US policy after seven decades of presidents who refrained from such a move and did not relocate the US embassy to Jerusalem.

2. On 25 March 2019, Trump’s administration recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Syrian Golan Heights, integrating it as part of Israel. This decision diverged sharply from previous US administrations, which viewed the Golan as occupied territory seized by Israel in the 1967 war.

3. On 8 May 2018, Trump’s administration withdrew from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Israel opposed. The agreement had been brokered by the P5+1 — the five permanent UN Security Council members and Germany— with Iran.

4. Another significant factor was Trump’s role in brokering the Abraham Accords, signed on 13 August 2020. This made the UAE the third Arab nation to formalize peace with Israel, following Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994. This paved the way for similar agreements with Bahrain on 11 September 2020, Sudan on 23 October 2020, and Morocco on 10 December 2020.

In his re-election campaign, Trump’s stance on Israel remains complex and, at times, ambiguous, especially on critical security issues, including Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Iran. However, discussions between Netanyahu and Trump suggest that Trump prefers “ending the war” and achieving a swift resolution before potentially re-entering the White House in January 2025. In a debate with Harris in September, Trump declared, “I will settle this quickly.” He reportedly told Netanyahu in a recent call, “Do what you need to do.”

In an interview with Time magazine in April, Trump criticized Netanyahu for failures that he suggested enabled Hamas's 7 October attacks — a rare rebuke for an Israeli leader who has traditionally resisted responsibility for security lapses. Netanyahu has since repaired the relationship, visiting Mar-a-Lago in July and maintaining regular phone contact. Politically, both leaders find value in appearing as allies. Netanyahu generally feels more aligned with Republicans than Democrats, especially given Trump’s plans to appoint Israel-aligned figures to key positions if re-elected.

Kamala Harris’s approach has not been well received in Israeli circles. The Israeli reaction to her absence from Netanyahu’s 24 July speech to Congress was critical, with some commentators suggesting it reflected a failure to “discern right from wrong” and citing her perceived coolness towards an ally like Israel. Some Israeli officials expressed disappointment, especially amid Israel’s challenging conflict with Iran, viewing her absence as indicative of her stance. Although the Biden-Harris administration has outwardly supported Israel’s defence against Hamas and Hezbollah, they have notably refrained from imposing an arms embargo on Israel despite reports that these arms contributed to widespread civilian casualties in Gaza.

Estimates suggest that over 45,000 Palestinian civilians — many women and children — have been killed, with nearly 100,000 others injured. Israel has demolished 12 universities in Gaza and prevented humanitarian aid from entering, leading to severe child malnutrition and even famine. While Harris’s campaign stated she disagrees with protesters accusing Israel of genocide, her recent comments about the “heartbreaking scale of suffering” in Gaza, her insistence on Palestinians’ right to dignity and security, and her criticism of the humanitarian toll in Gaza have angered some in Israel and among Jewish lobbyists. They argue her remarks are meant to attract Arab and Muslim voters — voters who see her as part of an administration that has supported Israel’s aggressive war on Gaza.

In conclusion, much depends on Trump’s stance and his willingness to pressure Israel to halt its war in Gaza, ease restrictions on humanitarian aid to Palestinians, and curb settler violence in the West Bank. If he wins, he may align with Israel on enforcing UN Security Council Resolution 1701 in Lebanon. Trump’s withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal might further cement an anti-Iran agenda aimed at preventing it from achieving nuclear capabilities.

It remains unclear if the new US administration will promote a two-state solution or if an alternative homeland for Palestinians will emerge, an idea gaining renewed attention. Additionally, a priority may be expanding the Abraham Accords, especially regarding Saudi-Israel normalization and ties between Israel and other Arab nations. The coming years could bring a reconfigured Middle East, potentially devoid of a nuclear-capable Iran and with significant implications for Palestinians’ aspirations for an independent state, even if demilitarized.

* A senator and former assistant to the minister of foreign affairs.