THE renewed America-Iran conflict has once again entered a dangerous phase, raising fears that the region may be entering a prolonged cycle of attacks and counterattacks. However, while missiles dominate headlines in the Middle East, an equally consequential battle is unfolding within the United States — one over its relationship with Israel and the political cost of that alliance. One of the significant developments has been the passing away of Senator Lindsey Graham, who for years was among Israel’s most outspoken supporters in the US Senate. His death has removed one of Israel’s strongest voices in American legislature at a time when US policy towards the Middle East is facing unprecedented scrutiny.
At the same time, a different narrative has emerged from Congressman Rohit Khanna following his visit to Israel and the occupied West Bank. Khanna described witnessing the realities of occupation firsthand and recounted an incident in which, according to him, Israeli settlers and security forces temporarily detained his delegation. He strongly argued that the experience fundamentally changed his understanding of conditions faced by the Palestinians, and intensified his criticism of Israeli policies in the occupied terri-tories. Beyond elected officials, prominent commentators have also intensified the debate.
In a widely watched interview, Tucker Carlson and his guest argued that US foreign policy has increasingly subordi- nated American strategic interests to Israeli priorities. The discussion went further, portraying the US as a power in relative decline.
These and other such developments resonate strongly with a younger generation of American lawmakers and voters who increasingly view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the lens of human rights, equality and international law. Younger Americans — particularly those aged under 35 years — are asking increasingly difficult questions about the role of lobbying organisations, campaign financing and the influence of foreign-policy advocacy groups in shaping American decisions in the Middle East, including the issue with Iran, with many asking what direct threat the country poses to the US itself.
The most powerful nation in the world increasingly appears to be shaping its policies around the security priorities of a much smaller regional ally, thereby eroding perceptions of American strategic autonomy and sovereignty.
Such an approach not only burdens American taxpayers and military resources, but also weakens the American image. This growing acceptance in main-stream political discourse marks one of the most significant developments in the evolving American debate over Israel and the Middle East.
History has demonstrated that foreign policy ultimately follows domestic political evolution. As the American society re-examines its priorities, Washington may eventually recalibrate its approach; not necessarily by abandoning Israel, but by seeking a relationship that balances security cooperation with greater emphasis on diplomacy, accountability, regional stability and equal application of international norms. The future of the Middle East may ultimately depend not only on what happens on the battlefield, but also on how the US reassesses the principles guiding its alliances in an increasingly complex and polarised world.
Qamar Bashir
Islamabad
Published in Dawn, July 29th, 2026
