The recent dismissal of National Security Adviser Michael Waltz—followed closely by his nomination as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations—signals deeper fissures within the Trump administration. The official explanation centers on “Signalgate,” the accidental inclusion of journalist Jeffrey Goldberg in a confidential Signal chat involving sensitive military discussions. But the roots of the decision run deeper.
Waltz’s hardline stance on Iran, including alleged unauthorized coordination with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu regarding potential military action, reportedly clashed with President Trump’s renewed focus on diplomacy and political optics. Had the Signal incident been the sole cause, a swift and direct dismissal would have sufficed. Instead, the administration opted for a "soft landing"—relocating Waltz to Turtle Bay—a move likely intended to contain internal dissent and limit media fallout.
A Strategic Void
It is becoming increasingly clear that the Trump administration will not prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear arsenal. In effect, Israel and the Jewish people are once again left to rely on themselves.
There are compelling reasons—financial, political, and electoral—for Trump to soften his stance on Tehran. Chief among them is domestic politics. Supporting Israel is no longer a political asset in the United States.
On the left, the older generation of pro-Zionist Democrats is retiring. Younger voters, shaped more by identity politics and economic anxiety than by Holocaust memory or Biblical history, are largely indifferent to Israel’s security concerns. On the right, many Republicans are frustrated by the enduring refusal of most American Jews to vote for their party, diminishing the perceived political return on staunchly pro-Israel policies.
The America of the 20th century—optimistic, patriotic, and infused with a sense of moral mission—is fading. What remains increasingly resembles pre-war Europe: polarized, self-absorbed, and ambivalent about the fate of its Jews.
Netanyahu's Dilemma
Prime Minister Netanyahu now faces a fateful choice: tolerate Iran’s sprint toward a nuclear bomb, or act unilaterally and risk sacrificing American military and diplomatic support.
Without U.S. logistical backing, an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would be limited in scope and impact. At best, it might delay Tehran's nuclear program. At worst, it could inflame global opinion—including within the U.S.—and trigger mass unrest in both European and American streets. The economic repercussions of closing the Strait of Hormuz would only amplify the backlash.
And if Israel does act, Trump would likely distance himself immediately—blaming Zionists for the resulting crisis. This is a politician who has accused Haitian immigrants of eating dogs and framed transgender athletes as existential threats to the nation. Blaming Israel for oil price hikes would be a politically astute move.
Antisemitism’s Resurgence
October 7th underscored a grim truth: antisemitism has returned as a profitable political currency in 21st-century America.
Figures like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez represent different ends of the spectrum, but all have normalized antagonism toward Jews in ways that would have been taboo just a generation ago. What once simmered beneath the surface now plays out openly—on social media, at campaign rallies, and even in Congress.
Even Evangelical Christian Zionists, once reliable allies of Israel, have grown notably quiet in the face of rising antisemitic attacks. Many of them seem more emotionally invested in Jews fulfilling Biblical prophecy in the Land of Israel than in supporting Jewish life in America—a community they often view as culturally liberal and politically inconvenient.
In this climate, anti-Zionism could become a bipartisan rallying cry. Should Israel act alone against Iran, Trump could cut off military aid—playing to both isolationist Republicans and anti-imperialist Democrats. This might not only solidify his congressional majority, but also deepen Jewish alienation from American political life.
The Road to Aliyah
If this scenario unfolds, American Jews will finally grasp the trajectory of their country—and immigration to Israel (Aliyah) will surge.
As antisemitic narratives gain traction—especially among TikTok-driven youth—accusations of “dual loyalty” will increase. Harassment and violence will follow. Ironically, this wave of emigration could bring about what Zionism has long aspired to: a permanent Jewish majority in the Land of Israel.
A Window Closing
Prime Minister Netanyahu must recognize the fleeting nature of this moment. The window to act decisively is narrowing. The Ayatollahs can and must be toppled—even without U.S. approval.
A limited tactical nuclear strike on an uninhabited Iranian region, followed by a strategic social media campaign encouraging Iranian citizens to demand democratic reforms, could catalyze internal revolution without provoking full-scale war. Faced with the destruction of Qom or the fall of their regime, the Iranian elite may finally choose reform.
If Israel can neutralize the Iranian threat swiftly—without igniting a global oil crisis or causing mass casualties—it will emerge as both a moral and strategic victor.
The world will be safer. And history will remember that Israel acted when no one else would.
Rafael Castrois an independent political analyst based in Berlin. A graduate of Yale and Hebrew University, he can be reached at rafaelcastro78@gmail.com.