RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/end-american-aid-israel

Two years ago, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez famously wept in Congress after changing her vote on funding Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system from “no” to “present.” The New York Times said that the incident showed progressive members of “the Squad” “caught between their principles and the still powerful pro-Israel voices in their party, such as influential lobbyists and rabbis.” (The line was later removed with no correction.) In People magazine, the congresswoman’s procedural maneuver to avoid voting was appreciated for its pathos: “Ocasio-Cortez Opens Up About Israel Iron Dome Vote That Left Her in Tears: ‘Yes, I Wept.’” In the end, the resolution passed the House 420-9.

Ocasio-Cortez’s bit of Kabuki theater fit neatly into the premade mythology of a domineering Israel lobby, popularized by academic John Mearsheimer, whose views are experiencing a burst of popularity in isolationist corners of the right. His central claim—that America has been pressured by an all-powerful, determined ethnoreligious lobby into acting against its own interests—is made explicit in references to “influential lobbyists and rabbis,” in Rep. Ilhan Omar’s tweets that U.S. support for Israel is “all about the Benjamins,” and in graphics like The New York Times’ infamous “Jew-tracker” that policed support for Barack Obama’s Iran deal according to the religion of members of Congress.

Belief in the mythic power of “the lobby” rests on a common article of faith that is shared by Israel’s loudest critics and most fervent supporters—namely, that U.S. military aid forms the cornerstone of the “special relationship” between the two nations, and that this aid is a gift that powerfully benefits Israel. Cutting off Israel’s D.C. cash pipeline, it’s assumed, would dramatically alter the balance of power in the Middle East: in one scenario by endangering Israel’s security, and in another by forcing its recalcitrant leaders to accept the enlightened proposals of Western policymakers.

While this fantasy version of the U.S.-Israeli relationship is useful for stirring up emotions and demonstrating partisan loyalties, it does more to flatter the self-importance of Israel-aid opponents and supporters alike than it does to describe an increasingly warped reality, in which Israel ends up sacrificing far more value in return for the nearly $4 billion it annually receives from Washington. That’s because nearly all military aid to Israel—other than loan guarantees, which cost Washington nothing, the U.S. gives Israel no other kind of aid—consists of credits that go directly from the Pentagon to U.S. weapons manufacturers.

In return, American payouts undermine Israel’s domestic defense industry, weaken its economy, and compromise the country’s autonomy—giving Washington veto power over everything from Israeli weapons sales to diplomatic and military strategy. When Washington meddles directly in Israel’s domestic affairs, as it does often these days, Israeli leaders who have lobbied for these payments—including current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—are simply reaping the rewards of their own penny-wise, pound-foolish efforts.

https://www.jns.org/jns/isaac-herzog/23/7/20/304430/?_

Far from the diplomatic triumph that some are making it out to be, Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s address to Congress this week left a bad taste in the mouth.

Certainly, the audience punctuated his remarks with repeated applause and standing ovations. For many members, warmth towards Israel is genuine and for some even profound. The Democratic Party, however, is sliding into increasing hostility.

Seven Democrats in the House of Representatives, along with the independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, boycotted Herzog’s address. Last Saturday, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told a group of Palestinian supporters, “Israel is a racist state.”

After she was forced into a mealy-mouthed retraction, the House overwhelmingly passed a Republican-sponsored resolution, with nine Democrats voting against, stating that Israel is “not a racist or apartheid state.”

Is Israel really supposed to be grateful for this? If a member of Congress had said “Jews are child-killers” does anyone think an adequate response by Congress would have been a motion declaring “Jews are not child-killers”?

The House should have strongly condemned Jayapal and dissociated itself from her. But, of course, that wouldn’t have had anywhere near overwhelming support. Indeed, when White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was invited to condemn Jayapal, she refused.

When it came down to it, Herzog failed in his most important task. In the continuing furor over Israel’s judicial reforms, with the Biden administration outrageously telling the Israeli government to abandon its policy and snubbing Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by failing to invite him to the White House, Herzog needed to avoid being played off against the prime minister. He needed to demonstrate there wasn’t so much as a cigarette paper between them.

But he didn’t do that. Instead, he spun the “heated and painful debate” over judicial reform as “the clearest tribute to the fortitude of Israel’s democracy.”