US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee is pushing back against claims circulating in Israel that President Donald Trump has turned his back on the country. In an exclusive interview with Israel Hayom, Huckabee says he understands the current mood but insists it's unfounded.
In the past two weeks, there's been a sense among many senior officials in Israel, including an MK who called me while I was on my way here, that the president has abandoned Israel. Because of the negotiations with Iran, the deal with the Houthis that Israel wasn't informed about, and the Middle East trip during which the president didn't stop here. That's why people feel that Trump, who once championed Israel, has now turned his back."
"Not at all," Huckabee replies. "If I were in Israel and people were trying to kill me every day, I might feel the same. I understand their emotions, but it's simply not grounded in reality."
So what explains what's happening?
"Let me break down what you mentioned. The tour doesn't include Israel, but it's not because he's dismissing or avoiding Israel. He has specific economic goals in those three countries, Qatar, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, and it's not about Israel being downgraded. That's just not the case. I fully expect that at some point he'll come to Israel. Just yesterday I pointed out that the Israeli prime minister has spent more time with the president over the last three months than I have, and I'm his ambassador here. So if there were any real split or rift... no other prime minister, president or leader in the world has spent more time with Donald Trump than Benjamin Netanyahu."
Is the president disappointed in Netanyahu? That's what I've heard.
"Okay, well I haven't heard that. I spoke to the president and vice president just this week. They didn't say, 'Netanyahu is a problem' or anything like that. And they would tell me, I'm their ambassador."
The conversation with Huckabee took place on Friday at the US Embassy in Jerusalem. For him, the role is a culmination of decades of pro-Israel activism. He supported Israel's right to settle in Judea and Samaria long before it was considered acceptable in the US political system. "Yes, I paid a price," he admits. "When I was young, my father gave me a great piece of advice: 'If you tell the truth, you won't have to remember what you said, because it'll still be true the next time.'" Huckabee stuck with that principle and his path.
Now 69, having thought his days in public office were behind him, Trump fulfilled a lifelong dream, sending him to Israel and granting him the freedom to pursue initiatives his predecessors wouldn't have dared.
For example, he opened his tenure with a visit to ancient Shiloh, in the heart of the Binyamin region, where he met with local council leaders from Judea and Samaria. "I didn't do it as a provocation or political statement. I did it as an act of solidarity with a nation I admire, love, respect, and have been visiting for 52 years. This is part of that nation, an inseparable part of its story. You can't understand the story of Israel without Shiloh. It's history. You can't deny history."
What does your visit imply in terms of policy? Is the message that these Israeli locations are legitimate from an American perspective?
"They are legitimate from the standpoint of any honest person. The Jewish people have been connected to these places for 3,500 years. I always remind people that not a single archaeological discovery has ever contradicted a verse in the Bible. That's remarkable. As for the policy implication: I don't know if there is one, and I'm not trying to dodge the question. I'm being honest. That's something only Israel can decide. The US can't dictate what Israel does. We're not going to pretend to impose America's view on Israel when it comes to its own land."
So if Israel were to declare sovereignty over those areas tomorrow, would that be acceptable to the US?
"I didn't say it would be acceptable. I haven't received any position from the president on that. But I will say this: In his first term, President Trump stated that Israeli settlement in Judea and Samaria does not violate international law. That was a bold move."
Is that position still in effect?
"He hasn't said otherwise."
Let's return to the issues that have fueled the perception in Israel that the president is making moves behind its back. Why wasn't Israel informed about the US-Houthi agreement?
"I think it happened pretty suddenly. It was a good thing, to avoid putting American lives at risk on our ships, on our shipping lanes. It wasn't a decision made with Israelis in mind. It certainly wasn't out of disrespect, and it wasn't about saying, 'Oh, we don't care what they think.' It was a quick decision. I hope the Houthis understand that 700,000 Americans live in Israel, and any attack on Israel could be seen as an attack on America, and that would change their calculations."
If they fire missiles here again, what would that mean for the deal the US made with them?
"The honest answer is I don't know. Much will depend on whether those missiles get through, if they hit people or damage property. We still don't know why the defense systems failed. The missile strike at Ben-Gurion Airport was a colossal and rare failure. Many may laugh at me, but I'd say the hand of God still protected this country, because human systems didn't work."
When we talk about protection, all the THAAD batteries, the ships in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea, are they all still in the region? Will they remain?
"There might be some repositioning, but not for strategic reasons, only for maintenance and operational needs."
So the American defense assistance to Israel is mostly here to stay?
"I have no reason to believe otherwise."
Let's talk about the US talks with Iran. Are they continuing? There were no meetings this past weekend or the one before.
"I can't give you an answer because I simply don't know when they'll resume, and I'm not sure anyone does."
Is the US policy to allow Iran some level of uranium enrichment, or none at all? Because we keep getting mixed signals.
"Yesterday on national radio, the president made a very bold statement. I don't think he could have been clearer. He said: 'The Iranians will not be allowed to have centrifuges, and they will not be allowed to have reactors. We'll either blow them up nicely or blow them up brutally.' Those were his exact words. He has said again and again, without any ambiguity, that Iran will not have nuclear weapons. That's the clearest statement you'll get."
I don't mean to be rude, but we have sometimes heard other voices…
"I always take the president's strongest statement as the most accurate. I work for him. He used the phrase 'complete dismantling.'"
What's the administration's stance on Syria? Is Ahmad al-Sharaa someone the US can trust or work with on expanding the Abraham Accords?
"I'd love to say he's going to be a democratic leader and people will get to vote, but I don't think that's necessarily the case. Will he be better than Assad? We all hope so."
Are there any talks underway between the US and the new Syria regarding the Abraham Accords?
"Very possibly, but I'm not privy to them."
Lastly, as a religious man, do you believe Jews have the right to pray on the Temple Mount?
"I have strong views on everything, but as ambassador, I had to set aside those strong opinions to represent official policy and law. This [Temple Mount] is not a decision for the US ambassador. It's one that must be made here in Israel, by the Israeli people."
