Israel and the United States: Political Strategy or Religious Alliance?

Although this may sound like a madness from a thousand years ago, given current events we increasingly ask ourselves, are Jews and Christians preparing for the war of Armageddon? … Let’s look at the evidence…

The Tiny State that Influences Giants

At first glance, Israel appears small, covering barely 25,000 square kilometers and home to fewer than 10 million people. Yet, its weight in U.S. foreign policy is immense. Since its founding in 1948, Israel has become the largest recipient of U.S. military aid, Washington’s closest ally in the Middle East, and a nerve center in global geopolitics. The questions are unavoidable: Why is Israel’s existence vital to the United States? What would happen if it ceased to exist? Would the balance of power in the region change? What would happen to the Arab countries of the Middle East… and what role do religions play in all this?

A Religious Confrontation?

The Crusades —a series of military campaigns launched mainly by the Church and various European Christian kingdoms between 1096 and 1270— were officially aimed at reclaiming the Holy Land, especially Jerusalem, from Muslim control, though they also pursued political, economic, and commercial interests. Symbolically, the Crusades and the current tensions among Christians, Jews, and Muslims share the same ideological core: the sacralization of territory and the conviction that certain lands —particularly Jerusalem and its surroundings— hold not only political but divine value.

In the Middle Ages, the Crusades were justified as a “holy war” to liberate the sacred sites, especially Jerusalem, where Christians venerate the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus; where Jews see the Temple Mount, spiritual center and site of Solomon’s Temple; and where Muslims hold the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock as sacred places. Today, while the language and alliances have evolved, the religious and allegorical charge remains.

Many evangelical Christians, especially in the United States, view the return of the Jews to Israel as the fulfillment of biblical prophecy. Orthodox and nationalist Jews believe controlling Jerusalem is a divine mandate. In Islam, defending Al-Aqsa is seen as both a religious duty and a communal obligation. The ideological pattern repeats: the struggle is not merely for power or territory, but for the “divine right” to possess it, making political compromises fragile and framing concessions as betrayals of faith.

It is legitimate today to acknowledge that the Israel-Iran conflict converges multiple economic, political, and military factors. Yet it would be a mistake to minimize the role of religion in this equation. In Israel’s case, national identity is deeply rooted in its biblical origin, so much so that the very concept of the State is intertwined with a historical and spiritual mission. In Iran, the political system is a theocracy, where the head of state is not a secular president but a supreme religious leader —the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei— whose authority fuses spiritual power with absolute political control. The Bible, the Torah, and the Qur’an are thus present in the political decisions of both nations.

Adding to this panorama is a unique element in U.S. politics: President Donald Trump, who in both his rhetoric and in the eyes of part of his base, has presented himself —and is seen by his followers— as a messenger of God sent to “save” America. This infuses another layer of symbolism and ideological-religious charge into an already complex geopolitical chessboard.

In the New Testament, John’s prophecy of Armageddon, coupled with Israel’s possession of Jerusalem is central to the biblical imagination that fuels millions of American Christians’ fervent support for the State of Israel. This support is not merely symbolic, it has directly shaped U.S. foreign policy in recent decades and has been one of the ideological pillars behind Washington’s unconditional alignment with Israel, even amid global crises. While churches are not supposed to dictate state policy, personal beliefs do influence political decisions.

Consider a recent example: On January 20, 2025, during his re-inauguration, Donald Trump declared: “I was saved by God to make America great again… for American citizens, this day is Liberation Day.” Before Congress, he reiterated: “I was saved by God to Make America Great Again,” reinforcing a narrative of divine mission. In May 2025, after a court blocked tariffs labeled ‘Liberation Day’,” Trump posted on Truth Social an image of himself with the phrase: “He is on a mission assigned by God, and nothing can stop what’s coming.”

Christian Nationalism and Religious Protectionism

On February 6, 2025, during the National Prayer Breakfast, Trump ordered the creation of a task force against “anti-Christian bias” in the federal government, led by “spiritual first lady” Paula White and Attorney General Pam Bondi. He pledged to defend Christianity from the “radical left” and protect social values from a religious standpoint.

The providential narrative among his Christian followers is striking after surviving an assassination attempt in July 2024, some evangelical pastors and supporters interpreted his survival as divine protection. Trump publicly embraced this interpretation, reinforcing his image as a God-appointed leader. Figures like Lance Wallnau have compared him to a “modern biblical Cyrus” —Cyrus the Great of Persia— who, according to the Bible, was chosen by God to free the Israelites from Babylonian exile.

Other evangelical leaders, since 2016, have claimed that Trump was “chosen by God” despite not being a model Christian, fulfilling a providential role by defending Israel. He has appointed conservative judges who restrict abortion and reinforce traditional values, and he openly promotes Christianity as a component of U.S. national identity.

Prominent among those spreading this belief are Wallnau, Paula White Cain, a charismatic televangelist and defender of the “prosperity gospel,” who has been a spiritual adviser to Trump since 2016 and now directs the White House Faith Office; and Mark Taylor, a former firefighter who claimed to receive a prophecy in 2011 about Trump’s presidency, later publishing The Trump Prophecies in 2017.

Indeed, throughout his terms, Trump has consistently reinforced the narrative that his presidency serves a divine purpose. From proclaiming himself saved by God to using social media to transmit a message of divine inevitability, his political discourse has fused politics, religion, and predestination, an outlook embraced by a significant portion of the American Christian community under the slogan: “Making Israel stronger and her people safer.”

The Prophecy of Armageddon

In the Book of Revelation, chapter 16, verse 16, a final battle is described as a place called Armageddon, where the forces of good —Jesus Christ and his heavenly army— will confront the forces of evil: the Antichrist, the Beast, and their allies across the world. This apocalyptic vision is interpreted by some evangelical currents as a real, imminent war that will occur in the Valley of Megiddo, near Haifa, bombed by Iran in 2025, marking the end of human history as we know it.

For many Christians, the reestablishment of Israel in 1948 fulfilled a key prophecy, and every conflict in the Middle East —whether with Iran or the Palestinians— is seen as a step toward that final outcome.

Jerusalem, therefore, is not merely a historical or political city but the “City of God” for millions of evangelicals. Apocalyptic theology holds that Christ will return to reign from Jerusalem for a thousand years (Revelation 20:1-6). Supporting Israel’s control over Jerusalem, including the Old City and Temple Mount, becomes a spiritual obligation.

Evangelical doctrine in the U.S. often holds that God has two distinct but simultaneous chosen peoples: Israel, the Jews, with a political and prophetic mission, and Christians, with a spiritual and eternal one. Supporting Israel’s existence is thus seen as part of an ongoing divine promise.

Historically, many Christian churches taught “replacement theology”, that the Christian Church had replaced Israel as God’s chosen people. But since the late 19th century, and especially in the U.S., “Christian Zionism” has gained ground, holding that the return of Jews to their land is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Christ. Supporting Israel politically, militarily, and economically is therefore not merely diplomatic, it is seen as cooperating with divine will.

Why This Vision Is So Influential in the United States

Over 25% of Americans identify as evangelicals, and within this group, Christian Zionism is widely accepted. Religious leaders like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, John Hagee, and former Vice President Mike Pence have promoted these beliefs in politics. Organizations such as Christians United for Israel (CUFI) count millions of members and have direct access to Congress and the White House.

Under Trump’s presidency, this religious vision proved decisive, from moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem in 2018 (celebrated as a prophetic act) to the 2025 U.S. bombing of Iran’s nuclear plants. Indeed, religious beliefs have shaped many of humanity’s wars, and this confrontation is no exception.

A Relationship Forged in History, Faith, and Strategy

The U.S.-Israel alliance is not just political, it is cultural, religious, and emotional. American support solidified after World War II and especially following the Six-Day War (1967), when Israel proved its military capacity and became a bulwark against Soviet influence in the region. Beyond the military, there is an ideological and religious dimension: Jewish Zionism found sympathy in American evangelical Christianity, which sees Israel as fulfilling biblical prophecy. Meanwhile, the Jewish diaspora in the United States consolidated remarkable political, economic, media, and academic influence, reinforcing near-unconditional Congressional support for Tel Aviv.

Israel as America’s “Land-Based Aircraft Carrier”

From a geostrategic standpoint, Israel functions as an undeclared U.S. base in the Middle East. It has cutting-edge technology, highly effective intelligence services such as Mossad, and a strategic location from which to monitor Iran, contain Syria, and counter Russian and Chinese influence. Cooperation extends beyond defense to include artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, medicine, agriculture, and next-generation weapons. Israel tests systems later adopted by the Pentagon and vice versa. This is why, when Israel feels threatened by Iran’s nuclear program, the United States acts not only as an ally but as a proactive protector. The recent bombing of Iranian facilities —officially framed as a preventive measure— was aimed at securing Israeli regional supremacy and preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

What If Israel Ceased to Exist?

The hypothesis of a world without Israel creates deeply unsettling scenarios for both Washington and the Middle East. Its disappearance —through war, internal collapse, or extreme international pressure— would create an immediate and profound power vacuum. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, and Turkey would compete for regional dominance. The Shiite axis (Iran-Hezbollah-Syria) would gain ground, weakening the West. The Abraham Accords between Israel and several Arab countries would dissolve, eroding prospects for regional economic integration.

The U.S.’s global prestige would suffer, showing an inability to protect its most emblematic ally, and NATO’s strategic influence in the region would diminish. The absence of Israel could spark an arms race among Arab nations, with some possibly pursuing nuclear weapons out of fear of instability. Humanitarian crises, mass displacements, and a resurgence of radical jihadism could follow.

An Atlantic Council report warns that without Israel, the region would lose a stabilizing anchor, potentially increasing Iranian influence and triggering new conflicts.

What Would Happen to Arab States Without Israel?

Paradoxically, Israel’s existence has served as a unifying element for many Arab nations that would otherwise be mired in sectarian or territorial disputes. The “Palestinian cause” has functioned as a symbolic rallying point. Without Israel as a common enemy, Sunni-Shiite divisions, monarchic-republican rivalries, and resource disparities could intensify.

Israel has also indirectly driven Arab military and technological development by forcing them to modernize their armed forces. Its absence could lead to chaos or new cycles of intra-Arab conflict.

Why Does the U.S. Support Israel So Decisively?

The reasons are threefold: Historical-geostrategic interest: Israel safeguards Western interests in the Middle East and serves as the first line of defense against Iran, Russia, and China. Domestic influence: The pro-Israel lobby (AIPAC and others) is one of the most powerful in Washington, with bipartisan reach; and Cultural-religious ties: For millions of American evangelicals, supporting Israel is a spiritual duty; for others, it is a moral obligation after the Holocaust. Even when Israel’s actions, such as the recent Gaza offensive or preemptive strikes on Iran, spark international condemnation, Washington maintains its backing, wary of losing influence in a region where crisis is never far away.

A “Super Alliance” That Could Change the World Order

We cannot forget that at the dawn of this century —on September 16, 2001— in a symbolic moment of prayer and national unity at the Washington National Cathedral, just days after the September 11 attacks, then-President George W. Bush uttered a phrase that stirred deep controversy: “This crusade—this war on terrorism—is going to take a while.”

Osama bin Laden had already warned Islamic faithful that the West intended to launch a new crusade to seize Muslim lands. In 1998, he had named his network of terrorist groups the “World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders.”

This alliance has been both a rock and a volcano, solid in commitment, yet capable of eruptions that shake the world. For some, it is the last bastion of stability in a region as much moral as geographical. For others, it is the epicenter of an endless conflict.

Israel is not just an ally; it is the forward extension of Washington’s strategic interests in the Middle East. From cybersecurity labs to Mossad’s elite units, from agricultural technology to Iron Dome defense systems, the symbiosis runs so deep that the two nations function as parts of the same political-economic-military machine.

Yet no alliance is eternal. If Israel became an uncontrollable trigger for global instability, or if the U.S. redefined its foreign policy, the relationship could shift from vital partner to strategic burden. Today, Israel’s existence remains crucial not only for U.S. security architecture but also for the fragile design of 21st-century geopolitics. Without Israel, there would be not a vacuum but a vortex, a regional arms race, a brutal power reshuffling, the collapse of fragile accords like the Abraham Accords, and the return of emboldened jihadism.

In this geopolitical chess game, Israel is not merely a piece—it is both the rook and the king on the same flank. As long as Washington and Jerusalem align in interests, values, and visions —religious, political, economic, and strategic— the alliance will shape the region’s future.

The question is not whether this relationship will continue, but how long it can withstand the pressures of a world changing faster than the alliances that sustain it. If this bond breaks, it will not just be another page in history; it will mark the beginning of a chapter in which the order we know collapses, and the world must again learn to live in uncertainty.

For in the shadows, away from headlines, another clock is ticking: Iran’s. The possibility that it secretly completes the production of nuclear weapons is not mere speculation but a scenario that alarms military strategists. An Iran with nuclear arms would irreversibly alter the Middle East balance of power, open the door to an unprecedented arms race, and push the U.S.-Israel alliance to its limits.

At that point, the conversation would no longer be about deterrence, but survival, because in a nuclear confrontation between Tehran and Jerusalem, the first to strike could be the only one left standing.

And there, at Armageddon —though the least likely scenario according to all strategic analyses—, lies the place where the Bible’s Christian prophecy of John describes the forces of good facing the forces of evil, on the eve of humanity’s end… a battle in which, paradoxically, no one may know for sure who the “good” and the “evil” truly are.

If you wish to share your opinion or contact us, you can write to psicologosgessen@hotmail.com. May the Universal Divine Providence accompany us all.

Vladimir Gessen, psychologist

© Photos and Images Gessen&Gessen