Follow us on social

Biden sends US troops to Israel weeks ahead of election

Biden sends US troops to Israel weeks ahead of election

Recent polling suggests there is no American support for this

Analysis | Middle East

The escalation of conflict in the Middle East will now apparently involve U.S. troops. President Biden has directed the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system to Israel, along with around 100 American soldiers needed to operate it. This is the first time that U.S. troops will have been sent to Israel since Hamas’ Oct. 7 assault.

This risk of further American involvement comes as the American public is increasingly against sending troops to fight Israel’s war. A survey conducted by the Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs released in August found that only about four in ten Americans supported sending troops to defend Israel if it were attacked by its neighbors, down from around 55% until 2021. This decision to deploy to Israel so close to the November election is made as general sympathies for Israel have slipped to a low of 33% amongst Americans polled in Sept. 2024.

After Israel assassinated several Hamas, Iranian, and Hezbollah officials, Iran retaliated with a missile barrage that was restricted largely to military targets and caused minor damage and no Israeli deaths. Following Iran’s assault, Israeli officials have been explicit in their intent to continue the cycle of violence. “Our strike will be powerful, precise, and above all – surprising,” Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said. “They will not understand what happened and how it happened.”

Israel has reportedly been planning its retaliation to Iran’s Oct. 1 attack, some experts believe that the THAAD defense system is an indication that this response may be imminent, and severe. Middle East expert Aaron David Miller says that Israel’s next assault will likely be “so comprehensive that the Iranians will have to respond.”

Military expert at Defense Priorities, Daniel Davis, says placing American troops in harm's way carries significant risk. “Naturally, if Americans are killed in the execution of their duties, there will be howls from the pro-war hawks in the West ‘demanding’ the president ‘protect our troops’ by firing back on Iran,” he said, adding,“if he wants to protect our service members, then don't put them into someone else's war. This is exactly the sort of thing that gets nations sucked into war they have no interest in fighting.”

The United States deployed missile defense systems to Israel during the 1991 Gulf War when Israel was facing threats from Iraqi mobile Scud launchers. But Americans were already fighting Iraqi troops in the region, thus not contributing to regional escalation or making Americans more vulnerable than they already were. The Quincy Institute’s Adam Weinstein also notes that the U.S. deployed THAAD systems to Iraqi Kurdistan where U.S. personnel face risks, but, he added, Washington sending them to Israel now “makes U.S. troops part of Israel’s conflict with Iran.”.

“The Biden administration keeps saying that they want to prevent a wider war, and yet every time they send Israel more money and weapons and now American soldiers, they are causing the violence to spread,” said Quincy Institute Middle East Research Fellow Dr. Annelle Sheline. “They must be aware of this, and therefore they are lying when they say they don't want a regional war.”

Weinstein says that with U.S. troops in the region targeted by Iranian-aligned militias and Houthi fighters off of the Yemeni coast, further entangling America in Israel’s regional conflict with Iran needs to be further scrutinized. “While we don’t know what’s been agreed upon behind closed doors, events over the past year give plenty of reason to doubt that Israel will consider U.S. interests in exchange for its support," he said.


Top photo credit: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. officials visit the Terminal Altitude Area Defense System site in IsraelU.S. Air Force (photo by Staff Sgt. Cory D. Payne)
Analysis | Middle East
US Marines
Top image credit: U.S. Marines with Force Reconnaissance Platoon, Maritime Raid Force, 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, prepare to clear a room during a limited scale raid exercise at Sam Hill Airfield, Queensland, Australia, June 21, 2025. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Alora Finigan)

Cartels are bad but they're not 'terrorists.' This is mission creep.

Military Industrial Complex

There is a dangerous pattern on display by the Trump administration. The president and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth seem to hold the threat and use of military force as their go-to method of solving America’s problems and asserting state power.

The president’s reported authorization for the Pentagon to use U.S. military warfighting capacity to combat drug cartels — a domain that should remain within the realm of law enforcement — represents a significant escalation. This presents a concerning evolution and has serious implications for civil liberties — especially given the administration’s parallel moves with the deployment of troops to the southern border, the use of federal forces to quell protests in California, and the recent deployment of armed National Guard to the streets of our nation’s capital.

keep readingShow less
Howard Lutnick
Top photo credit: Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on CNBC, 8/26/25 (CNBC screengrab)

Is nationalizing the defense industry such a bad idea?

Military Industrial Complex

The U.S. arms industry is highly consolidated, specialized, and dependent on government contracts. Indeed, the largest U.S. military contractors are already effectively extensions of the state — and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is right to point that out.

His suggestion in a recent media appearance to partially nationalize the likes of Lockheed Martin is hardly novel. The economist John Kenneth Galbraith argued for the nationalization of the largest military contractors in 1969. More recently, various academics and policy analysts have advocated for partial or full nationalization of military firms in publications including The Nation, The American Conservative, The Middle East Research and Information Project (MERIP), and The Seattle Journal for Social Justice.

keep readingShow less
Modi Trump
Top image credit: White House, February 2025

Trump's India problem could become a Global South crisis

Asia-Pacific

As President Trump’s second term kicked off, all signs pointed to a continued upswing in U.S.-India relations. At a White House press conference in February, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke of his vision to “Make India Great Again” and how the United States under Trump would play a central role. “When it’s MAGA plus MIGA, it becomes a mega partnership for prosperity,” Modi said.

During Trump’s first term, the two populist leaders hosted rallies for each other in their respective countries and cultivated close personal ties. Aside from the Trump-Modi bromance, U.S.-Indian relations have been on a positive trajectory for over two decades, driven in part by mutual suspicion of China. But six months into his second term, Trump has taken several actions that have led to a dramatic downturn in U.S.-India relations, with India-China relations suddenly on the rise.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.