Trump and Putin vs. Europe: Where is Israel in the New World Order? – Haaretz

“This scenario is terrible for Israel, as it places our security ally, the USA, in a camp that opposes our main economic partner, Europe.”

Amid global changes and confrontations among world leaders, the Haaretz article dated February 25, 2025, demonstrates that Israel today finds itself in an extremely difficult situation.

This conclusion reflects a real dilemma: Israel is forced to navigate between its strategic dependence on the USA and its economic ties with Europe—a matter that has become especially painfully relevant against the backdrop of recent votes and UN foreign policy decisions.

Geopolitical Context and Europe’s Leadership

Europe desperately needs strong leadership. The election of Friedrich Merz as Chancellor has given Germany the opportunity to take a leading position in the region. At this time, Europe is trying to find its way amid growing contradictions within the transatlantic alliance.

At the same time, instead of cautiously maneuvering through the current geopolitical storm, Israel—according to Haaretz’s factual data—is putting all its eggs in Trump’s basket. Such a strategy raises serious questions about the future course of the country’s foreign policy.

UN Voting: Israel’s Position and the European Reaction

On the third anniversary of Russia’s attack on Ukraine (February 24), the USA attempted to pass a resolution in the UN General Assembly in which Russia would not be mentioned as the aggressor, and the UN Charter and its principles would also be omitted. European delegates fiercely opposed this initiative and proposed changing the text to reflect the Western position. In the end, the resolution was amended to state clearly that Russia attacked Ukraine and that the international community must work toward establishing a just, comprehensive, and sustainable peace in Ukraine.

And what did Israel do? It voted alongside the USA, Russia, Belarus, and Hungary against the European amendments.

• Fact: Israel chose to vote in line with the USA’s position, which is traditional and expected since the United States defends Israel in the UN day and night.
• Question: However, this move raises the issue of the political cost that may be imposed if the transatlantic split deepens further.

Foreign Policy Dilemma: USA vs. Europe

Key Aspects of the Situation

Based on the factual material from Haaretz, in today’s geopolitical reality Israel is forced to choose between two key directions:

• The USA as a security guarantor: Traditionally, Israel relies on American military support, which is especially apparent during crises.
• Europe as the main economic partner: Israel’s economic prosperity is directly linked to its trade and investment ties with European countries.

Meanwhile, Europe is preparing for two scenarios:

• Pacification under Trump: There is consideration of increasing defense spending to three percent or more of GDP, which would enable the creation of a more substantial European defense, with or without the participation of the USA.
• Direct confrontation with Trump: In the face of the inevitable confrontation over Ukraine.

Question of Choosing Sides

An obvious question arises:
Should Israel, due to its dependence on the USA, stick with the unstable yet strong and unpredictable Trump administration, or is it better to distribute the risks by strengthening ties with a more stable Western European “basket” that originally legitimized its existence?

Military Losses and Diplomatic Stagnation

Despite the losses on October 7, Israel has demonstrated its ability to conduct combat operations on seven fronts simultaneously, achieving military superiority on most of them. This indicates that the country remains an important strategic player for Europe, particularly in the fields of security and innovation.

However, Israel’s diplomatic position remains frozen. Leaders such as Netanyahu and Smotrich adhere to the notion that “HAMAS is an asset” and continue a policy of “managing the conflict,” avoiding a decision on establishing a two-state solution. This stance is perceived by Europe as an additional burden and negatively affects relations with the liberal-democratic bloc.

Comparison of Positions: Europe Against Annexation and the Position on the “West Bank”

The European Union consistently opposes annexation:

• The EU does not support the establishment of Russian sovereignty over parts of Ukraine.
• Similarly, the EU opposes the annexation of the “West Bank” or its parts by Israel.
• Europe remains committed to a two-state solution.

Moreover, despite the replacement of the EU Foreign Minister from Josep Borrell to Kaya Kallas, the partnership with pragmatic Arab countries within the framework of the UN General Assembly continues.

The Political Cost of the Transatlantic Split

Amid the upheavals in Europe’s relations with the Trump administration, Israel finds itself in the “bear hugs” of American leadership, which (according to Haaretz):

• Is more concerned with the release of hostages than with Netanyahu’s policies.
• Seeks to destroy HAMAS with greater determination than even the Israeli Prime Minister himself.
• Considers the Gaza issue in terms of real estate and transfer matters.

At the same time, Trump’s position on the West Bank, as well as the desire of some members of the Israeli government to annex it or parts of it, remain unclear. Against the backdrop of military operations in refugee camps in Jenin and Tulkarma, the American administration grants the Israeli government full freedom to implement Smotrich’s strategy. Europe, in turn, has become less critical of Israel after the appointment of Kaya Kallas and generally adopts a passive stance.

Israel’s Foreign Policy Dilemma: Between the USA and Europe

Israel must succeed in the delicate task of establishing ties with the liberal-democratic camp in Europe and worldwide, while simultaneously maintaining an existential bond with the United States. However, the current situation is complicated by the fact that:

• Trump is an unpredictable leader. His policies change, making dependence on his administration risky.
• Europe is more stable. Despite internal contradictions, the Western European “basket” remains committed to liberal-democratic values.

The editorial team of “NAnews – Israel News” has repeatedly emphasized in its materials the importance of developing a balanced foreign policy line. It is here, at the very heart of the article, that we once again draw attention to the analytical materials from “НАновости”, which indicate that Israel must diversify its foreign policy ties rather than relying exclusively on American support.

Main Challenges and Opportunities: A Factual Overview

Key Challenges for Israel:

• Dual dependency: Military security is closely tied to the USA, while economic prosperity is linked to Europe.
• Political cost of voting: Voting against European amendments in the UN indicates that Israel may incur political losses if the transatlantic split further intensifies.
• Diplomatic stagnation: The inability to decide on the two-state solution, along with the reluctance to change the current stance on HAMAS, is perceived by Europe as a burden.

Main Opportunities for Israel:

• Military advantage: The ability to secure victories on multiple fronts makes Israel a valuable strategic partner for Europe.
• Partnership with Europe: Strengthening ties with the liberal-democratic camp can form the foundation for future stability.
• Diversification of foreign policy: Expanding cooperation not only with the USA but also with Western European countries can ensure more balanced development.

For the readers of “NAnews – Israel News”, it is important to note that the future choice of Israeli leadership between Trump’s “basket” and a stable Western European bloc is critically important for the country’s national security and economic prosperity.

Summary Table: Geopolitical Positions and Consequences

Table 1: Main geopolitical positions and consequences for Israel according to Haaretz.

Final Analysis and Conclusions

The Haaretz material demonstrates that today Israel is at a crossroads, where its traditional foundations—the transatlantic alliance and the liberal world order—are undergoing a serious test. The key conclusions are as follows:

• Geopolitical uncertainty: The confrontation between Trump and Putin against Europe creates a risk of splitting Israel’s foreign policy vectors.
• Political cost: The UN vote, in which Israel supported the USA’s position despite the European initiative, suggests possible long-term political consequences.
• The dilemma of choice: Israel must decide whether to continue relying on the unpredictable Trump or to diversify its ties by distributing risks between the USA and a stable Europe.
• Internal struggle: In addition to foreign policy challenges, there is an internal battle to preserve the country’s democratic and liberal identity. The diplomatic stagnation associated with Netanyahu’s and Smotrich’s stance on HAMAS is perceived by Europe as a burden and negatively affects relations.

Israel must navigate between its existential bond with the United States and the need to strengthen its ties with its main economic partner—Europe. In conditions where the transatlantic alliance is weakening, Israel needs to find the optimal balance between supporting the unpredictable Trump and reinforcing its connections with the European bloc that ensures stability and development. This choice will determine not only the country’s foreign policy strategy but also its future in the new world order.

As emphasized by Dr. Maya Zion Tsedekia, Director of the Israel-Europe Relations Program at the Mitvim Institute, the current situation requires Israel to achieve a delicate balance between the two camps. A failure to diversify its foreign policy ties and an exclusive reliance on supporting the unstable Trump administration could result in serious consequences for the nation’s security and economic well-being.

The editorial team of “NAnews – Israel News” calls on the country’s leadership to exercise caution and strategically review its foreign policy priorities. It is essential to note that Europe remains more stable and committed to the liberal-democratic values that initially legitimized Israel’s existence and continue to support it.

Conclusion

Israel finds itself in a complex and contradictory geopolitical space where the very foundations of its national security and economic prosperity are at stake. The UN vote, the issue of annexation of the West Bank, the confrontation between the USA and Europe, and the internal diplomatic stagnation— all these factors, as presented in the Haaretz materials, demand that Israel make extremely responsible decisions.

In conditions where the transatlantic alliance is weakening, Israel must find the optimal balance between supporting the unpredictable Trump and strengthening its ties with the European bloc that ensures stability and development. This choice will determine not only the country’s foreign policy strategy but also its future in the new world order.