The Democratic Party Moved Further Away from Israel

Elizabeth Warren believes that America has to teach those stubborn Israelis a lesson. According to Warren, when she becomes President, the U.S. will be obligated to reconsider its entire aid package if Israel adopts or maintains policies that do not lead to a two-state solution (Warren’s prescription to cure all that ails the Middle East). Warren went on to say that in such a scenario, “everything will be on the table”.

I believe it is Chief Running Mouth who needs the lessons here.

First, virtually all the aid the U.S. provides to Israel must be used to buy American military hardware, hence it is not exactly unconditional largesse.

Second, helping Israel improve its military capabilities strengthens America’s only real ally in that region, thereby providing the U.S. with a virtual buffer zone in one of the world’s most disputatious neighborhoods.

Third, why on earth would Warren believe that a two-state solution is even remotely possible given the current autocratic state of Palestinian leadership and their decades-old refusal to bargain in good faith?  Or does she seriously believe that Israel should simply remove itself unilaterally from the West Bank which would of course lead to a Kumbaya era of peace and friendship?  Gaza redux anyone?  Seriously, is it even possible for a sentient adult to think that Israel is averse to a peaceful resolution of the current stalemate?  I guess Ms. Warren doesn’t realize that Israelis may have their own ideas about the best way to achieve that objective and given that it is the Israelis who would be most affected by any disadvantageous settlement, perhaps they ought to be allowed the right to choose their own path?  I suppose it is possible that with Warren’s vast experience in foreign affairs, she knows what’s good for the Israelis better than they do, but I have my doubts.

Fourth, how exactly does Warren believe that Israel would react to a cut-off in military aid?  Has she ever met an Israeli?  The Israeli response would be the same as it’s been in the past when erstwhile allies turned their back on the Jewish state (see France or Germany after 1967) : Israel would find a way to make up the shortfall, either internally (altogether feasible given Israel’s economic prowess) or externally (possibly from sources whose political orientations  do not necessarily coincide with America’s interests).  In either case, America loses leverage over Israel.  How then will the U.S. ensure that Israel follows the path America prefers?

Lastly, when American political leaders have historically invoked the tenet of “everything is on the table”, that has always meant that military action was an option. Either Warren has never opened a history book (not altogether implausible given her inclination to keep inventing chapters of her own history) or she is actually threatening an ally in a manner that no prominent American politician has ever remotely considered or uttered.

With Warren leading in recent polls for the Democrats’ presidential nomination, I am asking American Jews one more time : how can you support a Party which grows more distant from Israel every single day and when one its most prominent leaders can attempt to coerce Israel into following a pathway that could lead to its destruction?

There are over 320 million non-Jewish Americans who can sift through the candidates’ positions on countless issues to decide who they will support, but I beseech the 7 million Jews in America not to be embarrassed to be one-issue voters and that issue must be Jewish and Israeli interests.  Fortunately, Israel’s interests and those of the U.S. are virtually identical, so no Jew should be discomforted by using whatever small influence they have to ensure Israel’s interests are recognized and respected by the people for whom they vote.

About the Author
Businessman, son of Holocaust survivors, father of two, grandfather of one, married for 45 years. Born in Israel but lived in Canada for most of my life. Proud and vocal Zionist.