Larry Donnelly: Trump's foreign policy balancing act is getting trickier

Larry Donnelly Law lecturer, University of Galway

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP has had a busy week. In addition to speaking at a funeral service for his foe-turned-friend, the late Senator Lindsey Graham, he met both Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

While paying homage to Graham, who died suddenly, Trump managed to say that “virtually everyone, Republican or Democrat, liked Lindsey”. Perhaps startled by such uncharacteristic generosity of spirit, he corrected himself: “Not everybody. But it sounds good.”

Zelenskyy and Netanyahu each arrived at the White House with a wish. The former, whose relationship with the commander-in-chief of the United States armed forces evidently has improved since their infamous blow-up in March of 2025, wants more assistance to defend his people from Russian air assaults.

The latter, who reportedly had been asking for a face-to-face for some time, hoped to affirm the unprecedentedly strained US-Israel bond and, allegedly, to persuade President Trump both that the job is nowhere near done in his region and that he warranted support as his nation prepares to vote in October.

Two things are worth noting in the aftermath of the two bilateral confabs. First, President Trump has demonstrated a penchant for conducting diplomacy with the cameras and microphones in the room. These get-togethers were strictly behind closed doors. It is hard to know what to make of that departure from past practice.

Second, all we have heard from the Trump administration is that the meetings were “positive and productive” and “went very well!” It appears that Zelenskyy is at least getting licences to manufacture Patriot missiles that he has been seeking. This may signal a pivot by Trump, who once opined that Vladimir Putin and the Russians held “all the cards.” Trump, of course, is extremely volatile, yet this is an interesting development.

Advertisement

What to do about Israel

While Netanyahu claimed that this was one of “the best conversations I have had with the president” and will sadly be buoyed by Iran’s subsequent attack on US bases in Jordan, which has provoked counterstrikes, he surely has been stung by repeated harsh criticisms from the man he previously recommended for the Nobel Peace Prize. Netanyahu shouldn’t be surprised by the rebuke, however. To say his stock is declining in Washington, DC is an understatement.

Whether this was how it happened or not – my strong suspicion is that it is closer to truth than falsehood – the common perception in the US and beyond is that Netanyahu convinced President Trump to bomb Iran.

That so-called “little excursion” has proven the opposite of the swift mission to capture Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro. Trump and his allies may not admit it, but this war has been an unmitigated disaster and has had far-reaching negative consequences. It is hugely unpopular with tens of millions of beleaguered Americans who will soon cast ballots.

Revulsion at the devastation visited upon Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank in recent years has engendered an ongoing, dramatic shift in public opinion in the US on the Middle East, which is being further cemented by the manifest futility of the Israeli-encouraged war on Iran. Surveys consistently show that the switch in sympathy is seismic and, given that those under 30 are much more hostile toward Israel than their elders, is likely to be lasting.

It will be fascinating to observe how this reconfigures the contours of American politics in future. For now, it is no wonder that Vice President JD Vance is furious at Netanyahu. The would-be successor to Trump has accused him of attempting to undermine the US-Iran memorandum of understanding, asserted that Israel is trying to keep the war going and admonished Netanyahu and Co for disloyalty to the only powerful friend they have.

As the midterms loom, in some Democratic primary contests, the Middle East has been central, almost upstaging sincere worries around the cost of living and other “bread and butter” issues. Notwithstanding that the trend on the left is in one direction, this is potentially dangerous for those who deeply want to deal President Trump’s party colleagues a blow in November.

The elections

In an increasingly heated battle for an open US Senate seat mentioned before in this space between Dr Abdul El-Sayed and Congresswoman Haley Stevens in Michigan, the candidates’ views on the Gulf have been to the fore. El-Sayed has ridden a wave of pro-Palestinian progressive energy. Stevens has benefitted greatly from donations from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

It has been a dividing line for Democrats, especially for the crucial bloc of Black voters in the state’s largest city, Detroit. Rev Dr Anthony Wendell, a pastor, civil rights activist and leader of the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) put it simply to El-Sayed: “Are you going to be more concerned about the West Bank than the West Side of Detroit?”

Related Reads

Trump revives claims of Chinese interference in 2020 election in prime-time address

Larry Donnelly: After Trump, what kind of Republican Party will emerge?

Larry Donnelly: The Senate battlegrounds that could shape an indifferent Trump's final years

Democrats should be wary of jumping the gun on this one. Yes, a period dominated by reflexive pro-Israel sentiment may soon be history. That said, putative standard-bearers – who are ambiguous on the desirability of a two-state solution or are even remotely associated, rightly or wrongly, with purveyors of antisemitism – still frighten off many of the “middle of the road” women and men the party needs onside in order to win congressional majorities and offices across the country.

By way of example, Stevens is trailing El-Sayed in the polls. But the same polls show that Stevens has a better chance of beating the GOP nominee. Michiganders will make their choices next Tuesday.

Despite this being the silly season, Donald Trump has a lot on his plate. The aggregated data indicates that less than 40% of Americans approve of how he is handling matters at home and abroad.

Wars rage on. Inflation hasn’t really abated. If his words and deeds are anything to go by, the president doesn’t seem to care very much whether fellow Republicans win or lose in the midterms. His rambling, insult-laden address at the rescheduled White House Correspondents’ Dinner was a disgrace.

With apologies for sounding like a broken record, the extent to which Democrats capitalise electorally on this mess is up to them.

Larry Donnelly is a Boston lawyer, a Law Lecturer at the University of Galway and a political columnist with TheJournal.ie.