One state solution or two state solution? Increasing aid or maintaining current levels? Negotiate with Palestine or take out Palestine? These are just a few of the questions typically asked when assessing how “pro Israel” prospective elected officials are. There are many domestic policies which can be embraced in order to combat anti Semitism and anti Israel attacks here in America.
These domestic policies can most certainly be universally agreed upon in the Zionist community and movement. For example, with the widespread Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement, bills such as the “Combatting BDS Act of 2016” a bill sponsored by Illinois Congressman Robert Dold (R-10) act as near perfect solutions to assure that state and local government are granted the authority to fight this destructive anti Israel movement.
As advocates of Israel, we can unite to support these measures and assure that we can stifle the movement rooted in hate and lies, the BDS movement. This is one thing we can all agree upon and is one thing we need to realize we can come together on. Yet the movement seems to split over semantics. The movement oftentimes splits when issues such as the legitimacy of actually pursuing and negotiating a two state solution is debated.
This dangerous divide greatly hinders the movement as it oftentimes labels good meaning people as anti Israel. The leading Republican Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, recently came under fire for saying in regards to the Israeli Palestinian conflict, “ I don’t want to say whose fault it is. I don’t think it helps. As president, however, there’s nothing that I would rather do [than] bring peace to Israel and its neighbors, I think it serves no purpose to say you have a good guy and a bad guy.”
Although it is my personal opinion this scenario is impossible to actually occur and could very well prove to be detrimental to the vital interests of the Jewish State, as I do not believe it to be true that the Palestinians are actually interested in peace, I most certainly understand this ideal and it is admirable to try to bring the two sides together to find peace. It is unfair to say that anybody who would advocate for this ideal is wrong as it is a legitimate option.
Despite these differences, the fact of the matter is that it does not really matter what we believe is best for Israel here in America. The American pro Israel, pro Zionist community needs to understand that the best option for Israel, is for Israel to once and for all decide for herself. The best option for Israel is to be on their own and not subject to fulfilling America’s desires in exchange for receiving billions of dollars of foreign aid.
We need to come by the side of our only true, Middle Eastern ally when she is in danger. Yet above all what we need to do is to let the Israeli people decide for themselves what is best for their own nation. It does Israel no justice to prematurely decide what is best for them and what is best for peace. It is destructive to the unity of the movement to become so divided over the best resolution of this. In the end, the best solution for Israel from America is no solution. The best way to bring about peace once and for all is to allow the decision to be made by the people whose vital interests are held in finding peace in the Middle East.