After Hezbollah launched rockets and drones at northern Israel on June 6, Israel bombed several terrorist targets in Beirut’s Dahieh district. Iran responded with roughly 10 ballistic missiles — the first since the April 2026 ceasefire — but all were intercepted by the Jewish state. President Donald Trump then ordered Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stand down. Facing domestic pressure, Netanyahu reversed course and struck about 15 Revolutionary Guard targets inside Iran.
Undoubtedly, Israel’s strikes showed that no diplomatic breakthrough with Iran was imminent — contrary to Trump’s suggestion after Iran attacked Israel. When the Abraham Accords were being brewed, Israel showed restraint by suspending West Bank annexation because a real agreement was within reach. That is not the case this time. Thus, Washington’s pressure on Israel to absorb attacks without responding risks signaling to Tehran that escalation will not draw decisive American intervention.
Late last year, the U.S. designation of Saudi Arabia as a Major Non-NATO Ally and advanced weapons transfers to Gulf states came without real conditions to curb Iranian arms to the Houthis or enforce Hormuz sanctions. Recipients gained cutting-edge hardware while Iran gained time to rebuild and probe limits.
This clashes with preserving Israel’s qualitative military edge. Jerusalem spends $45 billion yearly on defense and receives about $3.8 billion in U.S. aid. Of that, 86% goes back to American weapons makers. U.S. law ties the edge to technological superiority, yet dependence on political consent in Washington leaves it vulnerable to shifting priorities.
Polling shows the danger. Gallup’s 2026 survey found sympathy nearly even at 41% for Palestinians and 36% for Israel. Pew reports only 34% of Democrats are favorable to Israel, with Republican support at 69% — its lowest in over twenty years. A Yale poll found 55% of young voters want to end U.S. support and view Israel as an “apartheid state.” Volatile approval is a liability.
Unlike Ukraine, where reports document significant diversion of U.S. aid through corrupt networks, Israel uses support transparently against shared threats. Washington should recognize this distinction and give reliable partners more operational freedom.
The ayatollah’s regime exploits this paradox. It mines and monetizes the Strait of Hormuz, then conditions negotiations on the release of more than $24 billion in frozen assets. U.S. efforts to keep the strait open cost Iran an estimated $500 million a day, but Tehran has learned the larger lesson: limited escalation buys political protection for its nuclear, ballistic missile, and drone programs.
However, three steps can help Israel build strategic autonomy.
First, shift production of key systems to partner countries while keeping sensitive work at home. This builds revenue, alliances, and capacity while shielding supply chains from foreign political vetoes and sudden policy shifts.
Second, integrate Israeli technologies such as loitering munitions, drone countermeasures, and directed energy into U.S. forces through joint programs and sales. This creates lasting stakeholders inside the American defense establishment who understand what works in the field.
IRAN ATTACK SEEKS TO EXPLOIT ISRAEL-US TENSIONS
Third, expand regional alliances into a “Five Eyes”-like security network with the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco focused on intelligence sharing, early warning, sanctions enforcement, and maritime and cyber coordination against Iranian proxies. Real cooperation would raise costs for Tehran without constant approval from Washington.
Israel cannot rent security from Washington, and America cannot manage regional chaos forever. Iran uses missiles, proxies, and nuclear latency as blackmail. The June 6 events proved Israel can act decisively. Yet, autonomy requires industrial depth, technological leverage, and Jerusalem-led partnerships. Only then can Israel wield power that no ally can switch off or enemy dismiss.
Jose Lev Alvarez is an American–Israeli scholar specializing in international security policy. A multilingual veteran of the IDF special forces and the U.S. Army, he holds three master’s degrees, a medical degree, and is completing a Ph.D. in Intelligence and Global Security in the Washington, D.C., area.