By Elijah J Magnier on 09 Oct 2025

Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is sending a clear message: Israel is now powerful enough, armed enough, and self-sufficient enough to defy even the United States. In a recent interview, he boasted that Israel was “moving toward total self-sufficiency” and would “continue sharing its advanced technology with its best ally, the United States.” The phrasing was deliberately ambiguous, but the meaning was unmistakable. Netanyahu was signalling that Israel no longer depends on Washington’s support to conduct its wars or secure its future — and that it is ready to act on its own terms.

This is not mere rhetoric. Over the course of the Gaza war, Israel has received more than $21.7 billion in American aid, an enormous sum that has allowed it to wage one of the most destructive military campaigns in modern history. With that money, Netanyahu has replenished his arsenal of precision munitions, reloaded the multi-layered missile interception system, and secured critical military components from Germany and the United Kingdom. More than 200,000 tonnes of explosives have flattened roughly 80 per cent of Gaza’s infrastructure. Entire neighbourhoods have been erased. The war machine is now fully resupplied, entrenched, and prepared for a long conflict — or a new one.

This narrative of “self-sufficiency” is, of course, deeply misleading. Israel’s ability to wage war on such a scale is built almost entirely on American largesse. According to a new analysis by the Quincy Institute and Brown University’s Costs of War project, Washington has provided at least $21.7 billion in direct military aid to Israel since the conflict began in October 2023 — much of it in bombs, aircraft, missiles, and missile-defence systems — with tens of billions more in weapons contracts still to be paid and delivered in the coming years. Without this massive U.S. subsidy, Israel could not have destroyed Gaza so comprehensively, nor maintained the operational tempo of its wider regional strikes. The claim of independence, in other words, is made possible only by dependence.

In Netanyahu’s calculus, this is not simply a military achievement but a strategic shield. By presenting – and claiming -Israel as self-reliant, he is building a narrative that will allow him to resist, delay, or reinterpret any peace plan imposed from abroad. If Israel no longer needs American weapons or diplomatic cover, then it no longer needs to listen to all of America’s demands. And this posture is emerging precisely as the United States, under President Donald Trump, is pushing harder than ever to bring the war to an end.

Trump is now fully engaged in the Gaza negotiations, not as a distant mediator but as an active broker determined to deliver a deal. He has sent his son-in-law Jared Kushner and special envoy Steve Witkoff to Egypt to oversee the talks and press both sides toward a ceasefire. At Trump’s direct request, Qatar’s prime minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani and the head of Turkey’s National Intelligence Organisation, İbrahim Kalın, were also present. Their role is to exert pressure on Hamas and provide the political and security guarantees necessary for the movement to accept the agreement — a vital step given that trust in Netanyahu is, for good reason, virtually nonexistent. Their combined presence signals a new reality: Washington is no longer merely managing the conflict but seeking to shape its outcome directly. 

Trump’s proposed 20-point plan includes a ceasefire, the release of hostages, Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, demilitarisation, reconstruction, and international guarantees for Hamas. It is the most comprehensive diplomatic effort in years — and it is one Netanyahu cannot easily ignore.

But for Netanyahu, such a plan represents a trap. His priority remains the first point: the release of all Israeli hostages and the return of bodies. Beyond that, he wants freedom to resume the war. He has said as much openly. Once the hostages are returned, he intends to continue operations against Hamas, undermine any conditions he dislikes, and prevent the emergence of a Palestinian authority capable of governing Gaza. His ambition extends beyond Gaza itself: the ideological project of a “Greater Israel” — encompassing parts of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Iraq — remains central to his thinking.

This strategy of selective compliance and deliberate sabotage is nothing new. Netanyahu has a long record of undermining diplomatic agreements while claiming to uphold them. He played a pivotal role in derailing the Oslo Accords, which were meant to establish a Palestinian state by 2000. He has repeatedly violated United Nations Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 and the 2024 war with Lebanon but was later breached by Israeli incursions into Lebanese territory and the occupation of parts of southern Syria. Even Damascus’s declared lack of hostility did not deter Israeli operations across the border.

During the Gaza war, Netanyahu has repeatedly obstructed ceasefire proposals put forward by the Biden administration, ensuring that hostilities continued on his terms. His government’s rejection of partial agreements and insistence on maximalist objectives has made progress nearly impossible. The release of hostages — a humanitarian priority for most governments — has been treated by Netanyahu as a tactical consideration, not a pathway to peace.

The shift under Trump is therefore significant. Netanyahu can no longer rely on a cautious, divided Washington as was the case under Jeo Biden. Trump has staked his political credibility on ending the war and is deeply invested in the success of the negotiations. The presence of Kushner and Witkoff in Cairo underlines the seriousness of U.S. engagement. Trump himself hinted to be present at the signing of any agreement — a photo opportunity Netanyahu dreads. If the deal succeeds in full, it will be Trump, not Netanyahu, who is credited with ending the war. And if Netanyahu tries to obstruct it, he will be seen not as a defender of Israel but as an obstacle to peace.

That is why the narrative of self-sufficiency is so critical. By claiming that Israel no longer depends on American support, Netanyahu is preparing the ground for open defiance. He has accepted the first stage of the deal — the release of hostages — and then reject, reinterpret, or ignore the rest. He can slow the delivery of humanitarian aid, delay reconstruction, and maintain a military presence in key corridors of Gaza. If Palestinian factions respond with force, he can accuse them of violating the agreement and claim the right to “defend Israel.” Each step would allow him to undermine the deal without appearing to reject it outright.

Domestically, Netanyahu remains well-positioned to pursue this course. His governing coalition includes hardliners who reject any compromise, and he can call early elections — potentially within four months — if necessary. With the opposition weak and divided, he stands a strong chance of re-election. Political incentives therefore align with strategic goals: there is little cost to rejecting international pressure and significant gain in doing so.

The scale of U.S. involvement underscores just how high the stakes are. American backing for Israel’s war effort goes far beyond direct aid: when the cost of regional operations, logistical support, and related military deployments is included, U.S. spending now exceeds $31 billion. Washington is not a distant bystander but a central architect of Israel’s war campaign, financing and enabling the very military machine Netanyahu claims has outgrown its dependency. That deep entanglement gives the United States considerable leverage — but it also explains why Netanyahu believes he can defy pressure without paying a prohibitive price.

Netanyahu’s anticipated defiance also echoes another contemporary challenge to Washington’s strategic agenda: Vladimir Putin’s ongoing resistance to U.S. pressure over Ukraine to stop the war. But there is a crucial difference. Putin, while capable of obstructing Western goals militarily, lacks meaningful leverage over American politics or media narratives. 

Netanyahu, by contrast, commands powerful networks of influence inside the United States. Through congressional allies, lobbying organisations, and sympathetic media outlets, he can shape public opinion, constrain the White House’s political space, and make it more difficult for any U.S. president — even Trump — to impose costs on Israel. This unique capacity gives Netanyahu a resilience that Putin does not possess, and it is precisely why he believes he can sabotage the deal without suffering the consequences that most leaders would face.

The larger question is how Trump will respond if Netanyahu attempts to sabotage the plan. As president, Trump has considerable leverage, but Netanyahu wields influence of his own. Through powerful lobbying networks, media allies, and close ties to Congress, he can shape American political discourse and limit the White House’s options. If he can frame resistance as a matter of Israeli security, he may be able to shift blame for the deal’s failure away from himself.

The first stage of the agreement — the hostage release — has been achieved. Both Hamas and Netanyahu want it to happen. But the subsequent steps — troop withdrawal, reconstruction, governance arrangements, and guarantees — are fraught with danger. Each offers an opportunity for sabotage, and each will test Trump’s ability to enforce compliance. Netanyahu’s record suggests that he will use every tool available to subvert terms he finds unfavourable.

In the end, Israel’s newfound self-sufficiency is not just a boast — it is a strategic shield against external pressure. The vast flow of U.S. aid, the replenishment of Israel’s arsenal, and the destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure have given Netanyahu the means to continue the conflict even without Washington’s blessing. That makes the coming confrontation between the Israeli prime minister and the U.S. president inevitable. One is determined to end the war and claim a diplomatic victory; the other is determined to continue it and fulfil an ideological project that transcends any agreement.

Netanyahu may believe that self-sufficiency will allow him to ignore Trump. But it also isolates him. Israel’s destruction of Gaza has eroded global sympathy, its defiance of international law has deepened its isolation, and its political leadership is increasingly viewed as an obstacle to peace. If Netanyahu uses his independence to sabotage the deal, he risks not only a rupture with Washington but a broader backlash that even Israel’s powerful lobby may struggle to contain.

The coming weeks will reveal whether the prime minister’s plan succeeds. For now, two things are certain. First, a first step deal is done: Hamas wants an end to the war, and Israel wants the hostages returned. Second, Netanyahu is laying the groundwork to undermine that deal as soon as it is signed. The first step — the hostage exchange — will proceed. But beyond that, the future of the agreement, and perhaps of the region itself, hangs in the balance.

Netanyahu has spent his political life sabotaging peace. Now, with the war’s end in sight, he may try to do so again — this time armed with unprecedented military strength, political backing, and the belief that Israel no longer needs anyone’s permission. Whether that belief proves true will depend not on Israel’s arsenal but on Trump’s resolve — and on whether the United States is prepared to confront the ally it has armed so lavishly for a war it now wants to end.