On February 28, American and Israeli forces launched a combined offensive on Iranian targets, aimed at destroying the Islamic Republic’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs, all while undermining the foundations of the 47-year-old revolutionary regime.
The lead-up to the attack was marked by close coordination between both the Israeli and American military and intelligence establishments, culminating in a daring opening salvo that saw the assassination of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The joint military action between the two states, coined by the Pentagon as Operation Epic Fury and in Israel as Operation Roaring Lion, is the latest in the strengthening operational ties between the two states.
Intense coordination
The prelude to the strike saw intense coordination as Washington and Tehran engaged in diplomatic negotiations aimed at constraining Iran’s nuclear program in the aftermath of mass protests against the regime, which may have killed, according to some estimates, over 30,000 Iranians.
As American forces moved into the region, Israel served as a hub for American logistics, not only sharing in the operational planning but also hosting American tankers and fighter planes at its airbases, all while the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford sits off the coast.
The joint American-Israeli operation in Iran built upon the close coordination between the two states already illustrated during last summer’s 12 Day War. Israeli fighter jets pulverized Iranian air defenses and command and control sites, clearing a path for the American strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
The performance of Israel against Iran places it in a class unto itself, bringing to bear its own significant military and intelligence resources to the fore. When the Pentagon released its National Defense Strategy (NDS) in December, it described Israel as a “model ally” – a state that was willing, ready, and able to defend itself, in direct contrast to many of Washington’s longstanding European partners.
As a result, Israel’s unique advantages – its technological superiority, intelligence dominance, and the immense power-projection capabilities of its air force and special forces – have made Israel a force multiplier for American power.
Jerusalem’s strategic relations with Washington have not always been on this equal footing. The roots of the American-Israeli security relationship began during the years of the Cold War, in particular after the dizzying Israeli military success in the Six Day War. Washington, impressed by Israel’s military competence, stepped into the void to replace France as Israel’s primary arms supplier, institutionalizing what became known as Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge with the sale of F-4 Phantom fighters.
Israel’s strategic position as a pro-Western liberal democracy in the Middle East, surrounded at the time by Soviet-aligned Arab nationalist states, made it a valuable strategic partner.
Central pillar
The central pillar of this relationship is the sustained US military assistance to Israel, most notably through large-scale arms transfers, a considerable amount funded through American aid. These transfers were designed not only to ensure Israel’s battlefield superiority but also to support the development of its indigenous defense industries and to preserve its QME, congressionally codified in 2008.
Yet American-Israeli operational coordination remained outside the confines of the close alliance between the two states. Israeli leaders always insisted that the Jewish state would “defend itself by itself,” and Washington, during the Gulf War, restrained then-prime minister Yitzhak Shamir from launching retaliatory strikes against Iraq following a wave of Scud missile attacks, fearing damage to its multinational coalition to liberate Kuwait.
Perhaps the most significant step to institutionalizing the bilateral operational relationship was Israel’s transfer to US Central Command in 2021, a shift that was authorized during the first Trump administration, moving the country out of its longstanding alignment with US European Command.
This was precipitated by the Abraham Accords, the normalization agreements between Israel and the Gulf Arab states of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, together with Morocco and Sudan, embedding Israel within the broader regional architecture of American power projection.
The results have been there for all to see. During previous rounds of fighting against Iran, Israel worked in close concert with CENTCOM and its Arab partners to shoot down Iranian cruise and ballistic missiles and suicide drones.
Threats to US support
Yet all is not well. Shifting public opinion within the United States against Israel, which has deepened further in the aftermath of the October 7 Hamas attacks and the subsequent invasion of Gaza, poses a direct threat to the future of American support.
A Gallup poll released last week found that, for the first time since it began tracking attitudes in 2001, American sympathy now tilts more toward the Palestinians than toward Israel, with 41% expressing greater sympathy for Palestinians compared to 36% for Israelis, a sharp reversal from historical patterns.
At the same time, the latest CNN polling indicates that a strong majority of Americans, roughly 59%, oppose the recent US military action against Iran, with many respondents arguing that the administration has failed to clearly articulate its objectives or secure congressional authorization.
The announcement of the current campaign against Iran has reinforced many of these sentiments, with sharp criticism emerging, particularly from Democratic members of Congress, as well as influential podcasters and online figures on both the far-right and far-left, that Israel has effectively dragged the United States into another war.
Overwhelming public discontent with the intervention, combined with a swath of polling data over the past few years, points to a significant erosion of the long-standing bipartisan consensus that has undergirded the American-Israeli relationship.
The decline in public support for Israel, alongside growing opposition to the operation in Iran, coincides with the opening of negotiations between Jerusalem and Washington over a new Memorandum of Understanding, the current version of which expires in 2028.
The current MOU sets American military aid to Israel at $3.8 billion a year since 2017 and includes over $500 million allocated to joint missile defense funding. This agreement would govern, if the past is prologue, the next decade of US military assistance, continuing a series of 10-year frameworks that have historically set expected aid levels and structured the bilateral security relationship.
However, growing congressional opposition and renewed efforts to condition American military aid, combined with Israel’s own sophisticated and export-oriented defense industry, have begun to force Jerusalem to reassess both the scope and strategic logic of the MOU framework itself.
According to reports and statements from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel now seeks to shift the relationship away from one primarily defined by US Foreign Military Financing toward a strategic partnership grounded in shared research, development, and co-production.
This evolution of this relationship has been clear for all to see in the current war against Iran, with Israel operating as a partner and even peer to the United States.
The irony is that the erosion of American public support for Israel has occurred at precisely the apogee of US-Israeli strategic cooperation. Ultimately, American policymakers must remember that, despite political disagreements, it is in the United States’ interest to cultivate strong, independent, and capable strategic partners – actors who can project power on their own while simultaneously advancing and safeguarding American interests.
In this respect, Israel is without peer, serving as a central pillar of US policy in the Middle East and a model for American allies to emulate.
Jesse Weinberg is a researcher at the INSS.