If one thing has become clear this fall in the relationship of America and Israel, it is that the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cannot be considered an ally. Recent weeks have seen him use the impending elections as a tool either to force President Barack Obama to take a harder stance on the Iranian nuclear program or to cast Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney in a favorable light—and swing votes—and the election—to the Republicans.

The Obama-Netanyahu divide dates to May 2011, when Netanyahu last visited the United States. During the visit, Obama made it clear that he wished to see a dialogue between Israel and Palestinian leaders that allowed for a two-state solution based on pre-1967 borders. This would deprive Israel of since-occupied Palestinian territory as well as the Golan Heights, Syrian land occupied—occupied, as the war was never formally ended—by Israel ever since the 1967 Six Day War that many Israeli leaders believe is key to the nation’s defense. Since then, the prime minister has continuously pushed Obama to take decisive action on Iran while the American attitude has consistently been to wait, apply international pressure and negotiate.

Now, as if denouncing the president’s plans for pre-1967 borders on the floor of the Senate in 2011 were not audacious enough, Netanyahu has taken to meddling in the elections. An unnamed Israeli official announced to Reuters that the president had turned down a meeting with Netanyahu—a refusal that Whitehouse spokesman Tommy Vietor denied—and later that day, the prime minister of Israel announced that “those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red line before Israel.”

Republicans immediately attacked, denouncing the president’s decision, and holding it up as an example of a fecklessness toward our chief ostensible ally in the region. Obama immediately called Netanyahu, and Romney followed suit a few hours later. Top Congressional Jewish Democrats acknowledged Netanyahu’s behavior by telling him to cease interfering in the American electoral process.

Benjamin Netanyahu does not view America as a faithful, reliable partner. Rather, he believes that the United States is a tool to be used to further his own interests. The prime minister’s goals are clear; he wants to keep the Golan Heights and territory picked up in decades after 1967, and he wants America to take a hard stance, one that is blindly supportive of Israel, on Iran. Netanyahu wants to pressure Obama into taking that stance, and if the president does not, to influence the election to the president’s detriment. Romney, it should be noted, has vocally voiced his support for Israel, recognizing Jerusalem as the nation’s capital and saying that he would back a unilateral, preemptive Israeli strike on Iran.

It is unacceptable for the prime minister of Israel to make such blatant efforts to influence the American elections and actions with regard to Israel. It speaks to the view Netanyahu has of the U.S., but unfortunately for him, it will probably be in vain. Just more than a month remains until the presidential elections, and by every poll, save those from Citizens United and the Romney campaign, Obama enjoys comfortable leads in every swing state. In all likelihood, he will serve four more years in office, four years in which he does not need to worry about appeasing a fickle populace in order to be reelected and can afford to make unpopular decisions.

It will then be incumbent upon Obama to act on the changed Israeli-American relationship. Israel must remain a staunch ally, to be sure, but the Netanyahu administration cannot be trusted—even hawkish Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak criticized Netanyahu’s attack—and the president must acknowledge this. He should make it clear that he disapproves of Netanyahu’s efforts to influence American politics and take a much cooler approach to Israel as long as Netanyahu remains in office. To do otherwise would be to kowtow to the prime minister, establishing a dangerous precedent and weakening Obama’s position in all future interactions.