U.S. President Donald Trump deserves considerable credit for some of the most consequential pro-Israel decisions made by any American president in modern history. Yet Israel’s story was never dependent on him, and its future won’t depend on him either.

That distinction matters, particularly at a moment when many supporters of Israel find themselves struggling to understand the president’s recent posture toward the Jewish state.

Israel existed before Trump entered politics. It will exist long after today’s leaders have left the world stage. Its destiny has never been determined in Washington, nor has its survival depended on the decisions of any single foreign leader.

Still, it would be impossible to discuss the modern U.S.-Israel relationship without recognizing the significant role that Trump has played in it.

Few American presidents have taken actions as consequential for Israel as Trump did during his first term. He moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, helped broker the Abraham Accords in 2020, and challenged long-standing assumptions that had guided Middle East policy for decades.

Those decisions undeniably altered the diplomatic and strategic environment in which Israel operates. And for that, many Israelis and supporters of Israel remain deeply grateful.

That’s why many supporters of Israel are asking a simple question today: What are we missing? How did the president who was once willing to defy conventional wisdom on Israel become the same president now urging restraint when the nation faces ongoing threats from Hezbollah and Iran?

I ask that question not as a critic of Trump, but as someone who believes that he deserves genuine credit for the decisions he got right. And that is precisely why this moment feels so difficult to understand.

Trump achieved gains for Israel that previous American presidents spoke about but never acted upon. He recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moved the U.S. embassy there, despite decades of warnings from foreign-policy experts that doing so would destabilize the region. It did not.

He recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, acknowledging a strategic reality that had existed for decades but that previous administrations had declined to formally recognize. He helped broker the Abraham Accords, reshaping the regional landscape and demonstrating that normalization between Israel and Arab states was possible without first resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

More recently, alongside Israel, the United States took decisive action against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and military capabilities, confronting a regime that has spent decades threatening both America and Israel.

These were not symbolic gestures. They were historic decisions. And for that, Trump deserves real credit. Which is why recent developments have left many supporters of Israel searching for clarity.

To be clear, the president of the United States is elected to advance American interests, not Israeli interests. Yet for decades, many have argued that the relationship between the United States and Israel is not a matter of competing priorities but of shared strategic interests.

Israel remains America’s most reliable democratic ally in the Middle East. It is a critical intelligence partner, a hub of technological innovation and a frontline deterrent against many of the same threats confronting the United States. That reality has long formed the foundation of bipartisan support for the alliance.

In recent weeks, however, Trump’s public comments regarding Israel’s responses to attacks from Hezbollah and Iran have raised questions among many who have long viewed him as one of Jerusalem’s strongest supporters.

When Israeli communities come under threat and those incidents are characterized as minor or manageable, many Israelis understandably struggle to reconcile those remarks with the steadfast support they witnessed during his first term.

Perhaps the administration sees a broader diplomatic picture. Perhaps it believes that regional stability requires a different approach at this moment. Perhaps there are considerations that those of us outside the Situation Room simply cannot see.

And perhaps that is precisely the point.

The older I get, the less convinced I become that history is shaped solely by the calculations of presidents, prime ministers, diplomats and generals. Which brings me back to a much older source of perspective.

“The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord; like streams of water, He directs it wherever He wills.” — Proverbs 21:1

The verse does not tell us that leaders will always be right. It does not promise consistency. It does not suggest that any political figure fully understands the consequences of every decision he makes.

Rather, it reminds us that history is ultimately guided by something greater than any individual leader.

The truth is that we may be witnessing changes in the Middle East whose full significance will only become clear years from now. Iran is under unprecedented pressure. Hezbollah has been weakened. The regional order is shifting. Long-standing assumptions are being challenged.

And through it all, Israel remains at the center of a story far larger than politics alone.

History teaches that leaders come and go. Policies change. Alliances evolve. Political winds shift. Yet one thing has remained remarkably constant: Israel endures.

It endured through empires, kingdoms, occupations and wars. It endured through moments when conventional wisdom suggested it should not survive. It endured before Trump, and it will endure long after today’s leaders have left the stage.

That is why, despite questions about politicians, policies or diplomatic initiatives, my confidence ultimately rests elsewhere. Not in presidents, prime ministers, governments, military coalitions or diplomatic agreements, but in the promise contained in that ancient verse.

The hearts of kings may change direction, but the One who guides them does not.