Between 'America First' and 'Netanyahu First'

The slogan "America First" is raised by American President Trump as a symbol of American decision-making independence and prioritizing national interests above all else. However, the political landscape in the Middle East opens a wide door for questioning the extent to which this slogan aligns with actual reality, as everything Trump says contradicts the field reality. He has waged wars that affect the interests of all countries worldwide for the sake of Netanyahu, his corruption, and his political future.

Clearly, at the heart of this debate stands Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu as one of the most prominent and influential figures in the files of war, regional escalation, the Iranian file, and negotiations, to the extent that many observers are raising questions about the nature of the relationship between American decisions and the strategic alliance with Israel.

Referring back to Trump's speech before the Knesset and the subsequent public statements, he addressed Netanyahu's judicial file, where the topic of bypassing Israeli law to grant Netanyahu immunity for his corruption and mitigate the legal procedures against him was raised.

Trump's statements, where he reasserted similar positions in later interviews, sparked a heated political and media discussion about the boundaries of separating American political rhetoric from judicial independence within Israel and the significance of intervening or commenting on internal judicial files of an allied state.

This debate does not stop at the limits of statements but extends to a deeper and more sensitive question:
Is the United States still managing its foreign files according to the principle of "America First" in its strict institutional sense? Or does the intertwining of interests and alliances make some files appear as if they are moving within a political priority directly related to influential allied figures in the region such as Netanyahu?

During negotiations between America and Iran in Pakistan, Vance called Trump six times, and negotiations proceeded normally. However, when he called Netanyahu for the seventh time, Vance withdrew from negotiations and refused to include the Lebanese file as per Netanyahu's desire, indicating that Netanyahu's decision is fundamental.

In the files of war and negotiation, especially amid the escalation with Iran, the circle of questions broadens regarding the nature of decision-making and the speed of its transformations. Whether strategic decisions are built entirely within American institutions or deeply influenced by a complex network of regional alliances, the decision for war on Iran and bypassing international law was made between Trump and Netanyahu without American consensus, coordination with NATO, or coordination with Gulf countries who are in the battlefield and bear full losses.

Ultimately, the most sensitive question remains posed before public opinion:
Is "America First" still an actual governing principle?
Or has the political reality begun to reflect different balances that are read on the ground in a completely different way?

Netanyahu realizes that halting the war on Lebanon might open his files, and he could be prosecuted for corruption cases, which may lead him to lose elections and his political future. Therefore, he procrastinates and escalates the Lebanese file, not yielding to American or even Israeli decisions, and attempts to open files regarding other countries such as the Turkish threat and then the Egyptian threat. If there is no enemy, he may seek to create one and open conflicts to remain in power.