US-Israel Joint War on Iran: Constant Threat Exposure and Diverse Diplomacy ‘Defeat’

 

US-Israel Joint War on Iran: Constant Threat Exposure and Diverse Diplomacy ‘Defeat’

 

 

As the United States and Israel engage in their first joint war, the U.S. has been assessed as having lost due to the abandonment of various economic and diplomatic measures while being exposed to endless hostility and mutual threats.

 

John B. Alterman, a global security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), stated in a New York Times op-ed regarding Trump’s joint war with Israel, “By fully joining a partner adapted to endless fighting, the U.S. has abandoned the ‘role of an external force with diverse economic and diplomatic tools’ and the ‘firewall,’ which were essential elements in differentiating itself from Israel—its most valuable role in the Middle East.” He concluded that, ultimately, “what was once a win-win is now bearing the marks of defeat.”

Regarding the "win-win" between the U.S. and Israel, he stated, "Past U.S. administrations supported Israel's fighting without intervening, yet imposed restrictions, which resulted in a win-win situation where Israel could secure diplomatic gains through military action." Regarding the Trump administration, he noted, "In the case of Iran, President Trump adopted the Israeli approach and returned to the country that participated in the attack last June; even after the current military operation has ended, there is a threat that the U.S. will intervene in an unrestricted military attack based on constant hostility and mutual threats."

 

He stated that while it is still too early to predict how or when a war with Iran will end, Iran's new leaders will not surrender and may even be more radical; their reaction to suffering is to inflict suffering on others as well, and they fight with every tool at their disposal; therefore, future U.S. administrations have passed on the burden of restoring pieces of the U.S.-Israel alliance, which has grown too close, over the next few years.

In its Middle East policy, the United States maintained a firewall strategy between Israeli military operations and Middle East strategy, allowing U.S. governments to support but restrict Israel's fighting without intervening. This created an interdependent system where Israel could secure diplomatic gains through military action.

 

Countries around the world learned to accept U.S. military and economic superiority because they generally viewed the U.S. government as mild and predictable, even if their own interests did not align closely with U.S. interests. This created a completely different world for the United States when it began launching attacks on any country it wanted, such as Israel.

 

He stated that while governments in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia have become more tolerant of Israel in recent years, they may now harbor greater anger over what Israel has done and how it persuaded the U.S., noting that criticism of Israel is growing in the U.S. from both the left and the right, particularly regarding claims that Jerusalem exerted excessive influence on war decisions.

 

He added, "Foreign policy burdens could turn into domestic political burdens," noting that "this will accelerate the further deterioration of support for Israel among citizens of its most important allies." He defined the foreign strategic approaches of Israel and the United States as fundamentally different.

 

The Israeli military has maintained a state of war readiness for generations, and soldiers are accustomed to the "attacks on the same targets" that their fathers and grandfathers sometimes carried out.

 

Regarding the reason for this, he stated, "Clearly, Israel's political and military leaders have focused on the same challenges for decades and often view force as the only option." He explained, "When no short-term solution appeared, Israeli political and military leaders adopted a 'lawnmowing' tactic, which is a repetitive attack where 'the enemy is attacked, and when the enemy rebuilds, Israel attacks again.'"

 

The United States is completely different.

 

He stated, "Americans view themselves as problem solvers and seek to use their own power and extensive policy tools to completely resolve issues before moving on to the next." He added, "Especially after more than 20 years of endless wars in the Middle East and beyond, they were ready to stop fighting overseas and focus on resolving domestic issues."

 

While President Trump abruptly adopted Israel's approach in response to Iran, the challenges posed by Iran are not easily resolved. He stated, “The Iranian regime has remained obsessed with threatening neighboring countries, either directly or through proxies, and appears increasingly committed to its nuclear program.” He added, “Combined with paranoia and weakness, these characteristics make it a particularly difficult problem to resolve militarily, diplomatically, or through other means, and this is what led the United States to draw closer to Israel.”

 

The Trump administration adopted a strategy of rapidly drawing closer to Israel during its first term.

 

Trump’s first term rapidly attempted reconciliation between Jerusalem and the Arab world, and as the Abraham Accords in late 2020 were designed to counter Iran by normalizing relations between Iran and Arab governments, the United States played a linking role in this strategy.

 

Regarding this unconventional strategy, he pointed out a flawed start, noting, “It was reasonable for former adversaries to cooperate under the same military umbrella after finding common goals; however, four months after the Abraham Accords were signed, just days before the end of the first Trump administration, Israel began coordinating military operations with the U.S. Central Command (Centcom), which had previously been integrated into the Europe-based military command.”

As the Trump administration rapidly integrated the Israeli military into the U.S. Central Command, U.S. and Israeli officers responsible for the Middle East learned how to plan, train, and operate together.

 

General Michael Erik Kurilla, the Central Command commander who retired last August, visited Israel 40 times.

 

The contributor stated, “When bombs began to fly in Iran, Israeli and U.S. soldiers were working more closely with U.S. partners than any since Britain during World War II,” adding, “This close alignment came with costs that were not fully understood, and the U.S. ended up aligning with Israel’s war objectives.”

 

Now, remarks about creating the conditions for the collapse of the Iranian regime were easily made at briefings at the Israeli Embassy in Washington.

 

The contributor stated, “They speak easily without a clear strategy to achieve this,” noting that “U.S. war objectives diverged throughout the conflict, causing confusion regarding what the U.S. intends to do and what the Iranian leadership can do to end the fighting.”

 

Now, the U.S. has made its global allies and partners feel that they are paying the price for viewing this as an unnecessary and reckless war. Some are suffering infrastructure attacks, energy prices are soaring, and many fear acts of terror.

 

Violence in the Persian Gulf has compelled neighboring Middle Eastern countries to prepare for the next scenario, ranging from an influx of refugees to proxy combat.

 

The contributor stated, “They have been obsessed with economic diversification in the face of the energy transition, and now attracting capital and talent will become more difficult. While a war with Iran could benefit them in the long run, it will not be so for the time being,” adding, “With this move, the U.S. may be sowing the seeds of more problems.”

The joint attack on Iran by Israeli and U.S. fighter jets marked the first time in over 75 years of bilateral cooperation that the two militaries demonstrated joint operations, with both forces synchronized in every aspect, from war planning and execution to command and control, intelligence, and damage assessment. 

 

See <Mossad ‘Incites Uprising’ in Iran; Trump’s Initiation of Netanyahu’s War ‘Fails’, March 23, 2026>

<Trump Loses Control Over Iran War Conflict; Israeli Nuclear Facility Air Defenses Penetrated, March 22, 2026>

<European Governments Report ‘Accumulating US Damage’ Due to Asymmetry in Iran’s Multi-Layered Power, Protracted War, March 6, 2026>

<Patriot ‘Limits’ to Drone Attack on Iran’s Dimona Nuclear Facility, March 5, 2026>

<Trump Fails to Achieve Early Regime Change in Iran; Overseas Weapons ‘Activated’ for ‘Protracted War’, March 2, 2026>

<Hundreds Bet on Friday for Saturday Attack; Thursday US-Iran Summit, March 4, 2026>