New research from the Dor Moriah think tank reveals a striking disconnect: while policy experts debate grand strategy, ordinary Israelis have completely tuned out the geopolitical "great game"—and Israel's right-wing establishment is quietly preparing for a future without reliable allies
The Dor Moriah think tank conducted a two-part study examining what the Trump-Putin summit meant for Israel. They interviewed 14 experts between August 10-12, just before the Alaska meeting, then polled 1,009 Israelis from August 20-30 with assistance from the Geocartography Institute.
The Trump-Putin summit in Alaska on August 15, 2025, was supposed to reshape the Middle East's geopolitical landscape. At least, that's what 14 Israeli experts told the Dor Moriah think tank just days before the leaders met. The actual outcome? Most of the 1,009 Israelis surveyed barely noticed it had happened. Meanwhile, Israel's political right seized the moment to push an emerging doctrine: maximum independence from all foreign powers, including America.
The Summit Nobody Watched
The poll numbers tell a stark story. Four in ten Israelis (41.1%) had heard about the meeting but couldn't have cared less. Nearly three in ten (28.9%) didn't even know the two superpower presidents had met in Alaska. Among the 30% who actually expected something meaningful, just 6% felt their hopes had been fulfilled. Half admitted they'd been completely wrong to expect anything at all.
The gap between expert excitement and public indifference is stunning. While 93% of specialists identified Iran's nuclear program as the summit's critical issue for Israel, just 14% of ordinary citizens agreed. Instead, 40.1% assumed Ukraine was the main topic.
Geography clearly influences perspective. Residents of Asharon showed peak cynicism—55.6% were certain the meeting would change nothing regarding Iran, compared to 33.8% nationally. Living near contested borders apparently breeds pragmatism rather than geopolitical fantasies.
When Experts Agree and Nobody Cares
The specialist community demonstrated remarkable consensus: 86% recommended public neutrality while working behind the scenes. Most (71%) predicted only vague framework agreements, and 64% warned that failed talks would embolden anti-Western forces throughout the region.
"Despite their ideological differences, our experts agree on the fundamentals," a Dor Moriah analyst observed. "The Alaska meeting brought no breakthrough but has shifted the diplomatic chessboard. Russia's back at the table, America's signaling exhaustion with global leadership, Europe's panicking, and China's watching carefully. Israel needs to fundamentally rethink its foreign policy."
The experts' predictions about each side's motivations proved particularly telling. They saw America chasing domestic political wins and Russia seeking to legitimize its territorial gains. While 57% envisioned Israel playing Moscow and Washington against each other, that hope quickly proved naive.
The Russian-Speaker Split That Wasn't
Experts had warned about deep divisions within Israel's Russian-speaking community (13% of voters). Their estimates suggested 40% backed Ukraine, 30% supported Russia, and the rest had simply tuned out. "The Russian-speaking community has never been more divided," one liberal political scientist warned. "Any Israeli statement about this summit could trigger domestic chaos."
The data tells a completely different story. Like most Israelis, Russian speakers largely ignored the geopolitical drama. When asked about the summit's impact on territorial integrity principles, 26.3% said they didn't know, while 19.3% offered a noncommittal "somewhat."
The Right's Sharp Turn
While the public yawned, Israel's conservative media launched a sustained critique of the Trump administration. An analysis of Israel Hayom's August 2025 coverage reveals a remarkably consistent message: Israel must chart its own course, treating America as a valued partner but never as a patron.
The messaging intensified throughout August:
August 1: "External backing is unreliable. Israel must diversify relationships and strengthen independent decision-making." The same piece promoted deeper ties with India.
August 24: "Washington shouldn't dictate our timeline. We need our own security agenda."
August 26: "America could help but won't. Israel must act alone."
August 28: Discussing potential embargoes: "The very fact that Americans are debating sanctions shows why dependency is dangerous. We need strategic self-sufficiency."
August 30: Two pieces on the same day. Morning: "Letting American politics drive our strategy creates vulnerability. We need sovereign solutions." Evening introduced the new mantra: "America as partner, yes. At any price? No."
August 31: "Washington wants to design the post-war order. Israel can't bet everything on American blueprints."
September 1: "The Israel lobby's declining influence in Washington proves we need less dependence."
September 4: The conclusion: "We kept fighting despite American restrictions. Time for real independence."
Multiple factors are driving this shift. The right bristles at Trump's transactional approach to foreign policy. When he announced in June that Israel had agreed to a 60-day combat pause—immediately denied by Jerusalem—trust eroded further. The Sovereignty Movement openly challenged the Netanyahu-Trump relationship: "No Palestinian state, period. Not for anyone's Nobel Prize."
Russia: Neither Friend Nor Foe
Israeli attitudes toward Russia remain deeply complicated. While 36% believe renewed U.S.-Russia dialogue helps Israel (including 5.5% expecting major improvements), 22.6% fear it makes things worse.
Surprisingly, only 6.7% think the summit will deepen Russia-Iran cooperation. Despite the experts' warnings, the public doesn't see Moscow as Tehran's reliable ally. A third (33.8%) expect no Iran-related changes, while 21.7% simply don't know.
Religious Israelis show greater optimism: 41.9% see benefits in U.S.-Russia communication versus 32.6% of secular Israelis. This aligns with religious-conservative analysts who view Russia as potentially sharing their traditional values.
How Money and Education Shape Worldviews
Wealth and education strongly influence how Israelis process international events. Among lower-income respondents, 37.2% missed the summit entirely, compared to just 18.1% of affluent Israelis. The wealthy also had more specific expectations—20.6% anticipated concrete bilateral progress compared to 12.5% of poorer respondents.
Ukraine matters more to the affluent (50.2% called it the priority versus 31.4% of lower-income Israelis). The Middle East concerns the less wealthy more (12.8% versus 7.6%). Education shows similar patterns: summit awareness rises from 61.4% among high school graduates to 77.9% among university graduates.
The New Strategic Reality
Most experts (71%) expected economic deals between Washington and Moscow; 64% thought they'd discuss the Arctic. Instead, the summit revealed a harsher reality. As one religious-conservative expert warned: "The real threat isn't this summit—it's the trend. Trump's America is abandoning global leadership. An 83% State Department budget cut, dismantling USAID—these are warning signs. Israel must prepare for life without America's protective umbrella."
Nearly half of Israelis (46.5%) believe the summit won't affect international recognition of Israeli sovereignty claims. Another quarter (25.7%) aren't sure. On the Palestinian issue, 26.5% see potential benefits from U.S.-Russia dialogue, 23.8% expect no impact, and 28.5% can't even hazard a guess.
Welcome to Strategic Uncertainty
The Alaska summit failed to transform Middle Eastern geopolitics—71% of experts predicted modest outcomes, and the public's indifference proved them right. But it has exposed a fundamental shift in Israeli strategic thinking.
When the American president cares more about a Nobel Prize than allied security, when Russia plays all sides while pursuing its own agenda, when 15.2% of Israelis think superpower summits are irrelevant to their country—strategic solitude begins to look like the smart play.
Israeli society grasps this instinctively. That explains the collective shrug at the "summit of the century," the deepening skepticism about external guarantees, and the quiet embrace of self-reliance. Let the great powers play their games. Israel won't be anyone's pawn anymore, regardless of the cost.
As one expert put it: "August 15 marks the beginning of the end for the liberal world order. But Israel might actually benefit. A multipolar world offers more room to maneuver—if we can abandon our old assumptions."
This article was written in cooperation with Dor Moria