Not getting involved: JD Vance opts out of endorsing Netanyahu as Israel PM warns of future ‘hostile’ US president

US Vice President JD Vance has declined to endorse Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for re-election, distancing himself from President Donald Trump’s recent public backing of the Israeli leader just days before Israel’s election. The comments come as Netanyahu warns that Israel could face a potentially “hostile” US president after Trump leaves office, underscoring the uncertainty surrounding the country’s longer-term relationship with Washington.

In an interview with journalist Mark Halperin aboard Air Force Two on Monday, Vance said he would not intervene in Israeli electoral politics, despite Trump’s endorsement of Netanyahu over the weekend.

“I endorse American candidates, and that’s where I’m focused on is the midterm,” Vance said. “I’m not getting involved in Israeli elections.”

Asked whether he opposed endorsing Netanyahu, Vance rejected both positions.

“I’m not anti-endorsing him. I’m not pro-endorsing him. I’m not getting involved in Israeli elections,” he said.

Vance declines to back Netanyahu despite Trump endorsement

US President Donald Trump publicly endorsed Netanyahu on Saturday, describing him as a “Great Warrior Prime Minister” in a social media post. The president had previously said he was staying out of Israeli politics.

“I’m not involved in [Israeli] politics anymore,” Trump told Time earlier this month.

Vance’s refusal to endorse Netanyahu marks a contrast with the president’s position, although the vice president framed his decision as a matter of keeping his focus on American elections rather than opposing the Israeli leader.

His stance also comes despite his earlier involvement in another country's election. Vance travelled to Budapest earlier this year to campaign for Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who had Trump’s backing but subsequently lost the election.

The contrast has drawn attention as Netanyahu seeks to maintain close ties with the Trump administration while preparing for the political and security challenges facing Israel.

Netanyahu warns Israel could face a ‘hostile’ US president

Netanyahu has cautioned that Israel cannot assume its relationship with Washington will remain favourable indefinitely. Speaking on Sunday while presenting his security strategy for the coming years, he highlighted the limited time remaining in Trump’s current term.

“There is a window of another two years with President Trump, and one of the questions in these elections is who will work with Trump? Who will complete the remaining work?” Netanyahu said.

He also acknowledged the possibility that a future US administration could take a less supportive approach towards Israel.

“We need to do the best we can during these two years – and in the two years afterward – to act when things are good and even if things are bad,” he said.

Netanyahu said he was working to broaden Israel’s international partnerships to prepare for changing political circumstances in Washington.

“I am working now with many countries in our region, as well as countries outside our region, to establish these alliances – for example, with India, and there are other countries as well,” he said.

The remarks suggest that Netanyahu’s strategy extends beyond maintaining his relationship with Trump to building partnerships that could provide diplomatic support under a future US president.

Pete Hegseth visits Israel amid Iran military discussions

The political developments coincided with an unannounced visit to Israel by US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, who met Netanyahu on Monday, according to sources cited by Axios.

The meeting took place at Ovda Air Base in southern Israel, where US refuelling aircraft and fighter jets are deployed, the sources said. Hegseth also met US troops at the base.

The visit came eight days before Israel’s election and amid discussions between Washington and Jerusalem about potentially resuming major combat operations against Iran.

Hegseth later posted an image of himself visiting troops serving under US Central Command, which oversees American military operations across the Middle East and other parts of its area of responsibility.

The timing places the visit against two overlapping developments: Israel’s domestic political contest and continuing discussions about its military posture towards Iran.

Israel election puts US ties and security strategy in focus

Netanyahu’s warnings about a potentially less supportive US administration highlight the importance of relations with Washington to Israel’s security planning. Trump’s endorsement offers public support ahead of the election, but Vance’s refusal to intervene illustrates that senior figures in the administration are not necessarily taking identical approaches to Israeli politics.

The broader question is how Israel would manage its security priorities and diplomatic relationships if the political balance in Washington changes after Trump’s presidency.

About the Author

Sayantani Biswas is an assistant editor at Livemint with seven years of experience covering geopolitics, foreign policy, international relations and global power dynamics. She reports on Indian and international politics, including elections worldwide, and specialises in historically grounded analysis of contemporary conflicts and state decisions. She joined Mint in 2021, after covering politics at publications including The Telegraph. <br> She holds an MPhil in Comparative Literature from Jadavpur University (2019), with a specialisation in postcolonial Latin American literature. Her research examined economic nationalism through Eduardo Galeano’s Open Veins of Latin America. She also writes on political language, cultural memory and the long shadows of conflict. <br> Biswas grew up in Durgapur, an industrial town in West Bengal shaped by migration, which drew families from across India to the Durgapur Steel Plant. As the only child in a joint family, she spent years listening—almost obsessively—to her grandparents’ testimonies of struggle, fear and loss as they fled Bangladesh during the Partition of 1947. This formative exposure to lived historical memory later converged with her training in Comparative Literature, equipping her to analyse socio-economic structures and their reverberations. <br> Outside the newsroom, she gravitates towards cultural history and critical theory, returning often to texts such as Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed. As a journalist, she is committed to accuracy, intellectual rigour and fairness, and believes political reporting demands not only clarity and speed, but historical depth, contextual precision, and a disciplined resistance to spectacle.