Israel and the End of Its Functional Role: Beyond Arab Oil and the Illusion of the Eternal Ally

By Abdulaziz Yaqub

(1)
Since its inception, Israel has never been a pure project for the defense of Jews or a reflection of “democratic” values as often promoted in Western narratives. Rather, it emerged as a strategic tool designed to fulfill a political and security function within the structure of the new colonial order. Planted in the heart of a highly volatile East, Israel was not meant to settle, but to remain on constant alert—brandishing power when needed and recalibrating the balance whenever Western interests, particularly energy security, were threatened.

Its role was not so much about protecting its own citizens as it was about safeguarding the formula that ensured the flow of oil and the continuation of Western dominance. Over the decades, Israel proved effective as a regional power performing multiple tasks: waging proxy wars, containing the rise of radical forces, and deterring sovereign liberation movements in the region. It was useful—not because of moral or cultural superiority—but because it served a clear function in protecting the strategic framework of the Western economy and preventing the East from slipping out of hegemonic control.

(2)
But time recognizes no eternal function. With major technological transformations, shifting energy sources, and the declining U.S. dependence on Gulf oil, the question becomes valid: Is Israel still a strategic necessity, or is it becoming an ally that has lost the rationale for its exceptional status and turned into a political and moral liability?

The rules of the game have changed. The United States, which once treated the Strait of Hormuz as if it were part of its own borders, now prefers its domestic pipelines and alternative sources to deploying warships in the Gulf. The desert is no longer a priority—the compass now points toward Asia, where interests converge in supply chains, technology, and artificial intelligence.

In this context, Israel’s traditional role as an advanced outpost guarding interests is diminishing. It is gradually turning into a shaky ideological wall, justifying its existence through security discourse rather than real strategic effectiveness. Its image as a “democratic oasis” is no longer enough to justify unconditional support—especially in light of its behavior in Gaza, the rise of religious right-wing factions, and deepening internal divisions.

(3)
Today, Israel is in an open confrontation with its former image. The rise of the far right, human rights violations, and the recurring scenes of destruction in Gaza are no longer hidden behind a veil of moral purity. In the eyes of young American generations on university campuses—who consume news from diverse sources and question dominant narratives—Israel no longer appears as a small besieged state, but as a heavily armed power wielding violence as a tool of control.

Though official support continues—including $3.8 billion in annual military aid—shifting public sentiment in the U.S., particularly among youth and progressive circles, is raising fundamental questions about the meaning of continued support and its moral cost to America’s global image.

(4)
At this historical juncture, Israel enters a real danger zone when it no longer has a clear functional role nor a moral legitimacy to justify ongoing support. It then becomes a source of tension rather than a stabilizing force. This realization is gradually dawning on some U.S. policymakers—especially those who approach politics from a lens of utility rather than ideology. Ideology alone no longer justifies alliances in a world where interests shift rapidly.

Even Donald Trump—known more for his transactional mindset than political romanticism—grasped this shift early on. His repeated neglect of Israel in speeches and initiatives was not a diplomatic oversight, but a tacit message: there is no sanctity in alliances, and loyalties are not permanent. Those who add no value can be bypassed, even if they are historic allies.

(5)
Nonetheless, the scene does not conclude with dramatic collapse, but with a gradual retreat from the center of events. The issue is not hostility toward Israel, but a redefinition of interests. If Israel fails to renew its role within a transforming global context—through digital economy, cyber superiority, or a meaningful technological role—it may find itself on the margins of the equation, weighed down by its bloody history and its inability to adapt.

At that point, silence about it becomes wiser than defense, and abandoning it becomes easier than bearing its consequences. Thus, the end of influence begins not with violent collapse, but with the fading of role, erosion of exceptionality, and the quiet withdrawal of the ally from history’s stage.