Symposium: Will US-Israel relations survive the last year?
We asked if the post-Oct. 7 war has permanently altered Washington's 80-year commitment to the Jewish state
Responsible Statecraft
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/october-7-anniversary-israel/
Oct 03, 2024
The U.S.-Israel relationship has been largely marked by Washington’s consistent commitment to Israel’s security, beginning with the formal recognition of the Jewish state in 1948 by President Harry S. Truman.
While the United States did not become Israel’s dominant arms supplier until after the 1967 war, it has been clear to all in the region since at least the Kennedy era that Washington was in Israel’s corner — despite strong Arab opposition, Israel’s wars on and with its neighbors, and its ongoing and often brutal struggle to deny the national aspirations of the Palestinian people in the name of ensuring its own security.
No matter the circumstances, from Tel Aviv’s secret nuclear weapons program in the early 1960s to the building of illegal settlements on the Golan Heights, in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, Washington has responded with more weapons, and more money for Israel — well over $300 billion in all, the most U.S. aid provided to a single foreign country by far. It has ensured Israel a Qualitative Military Edge, requiring Washington to maintain Tel Aviv's ability “to defeat any credible conventional military threat from any individual state or possible coalition of states or from non-state actors.”
Despite this largess, Israeli leaders have often defied U.S. presidents and policy, raising questions about the balance in the relationship, or, as President Bill Clinton once indelicately put it after meeting with Israel’s longest-serving and current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, “Who’s the f……. Superpower here?”
More recently, Netanyahu’s government has repeatedly rejected President Biden’s appeals to agree to ceasefire terms in Gaza. Netanyahu himself has boasted of his ability to resist or manipulate Washington in ways that further his aims, once asserting, "I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won't get in our way."
After a full year of war, Israel has used a steady flow of American weapons to wreak revenge for the Oct. 7 massacre by Hamas in which 1,138 Israelis were killed and about 200 more taken hostage. To date, more than 41,000 Gazans, mostly civilians, have been killed, while at least 90 percent of Gaza’s 2.2 million population has been displaced, and the vast majority of its buildings and infrastructure destroyed.
With Israel now invading southern Lebanon and Washington’s nightmare scenario of a regional war breaking out with Iran looming, it would seem U.S.-Israeli relations have reached a critical juncture.
We asked this group of scholars, journalists, and former diplomats if, for the first time in many decades, a real shift might be occurring. In other words, Has the last year of war permanently changed the U.S.-Israel relationship? If so, how? If not, why?
***
Geoff Aronson, Andrew Bacevich, Daniel Bessner, Dan DePetris, Robert Hunter, Shireen Hunter, Daniel Levy, Rajan Menon, Paul Pillar, Annelle Sheline, Steve Simon, Barbara Slavin, Hadar Suskind, Saran Leah Whitson, James Zogby
********************
Geoff Aronson, Middle East Institute: The relationship between the U.S. and Israel remains grounded in seminal U.S.-Israeli understandings reached in the aftermath of the June 1967 war, according to which the U.S. pledged to maintain Israel’s conventional military superiority over any combination of regional enemies. In return, Israel committed to maintain ambiguity about its nuclear weapons arsenal — undeclared and undeployed.
During this last year in particular, the Biden administration has remained true to this commitment to maintain Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge (QME) — a commitment enshrined in U.S. law — notwithstanding unprecedented concerns about Israel’s (mis)use of U.S.-supplied weapons.
The U.S. insists that its support for Israel remains “ironclad.” “Make no mistake,” insists the president, “the United States is fully, fully supportive of Israel.” However, the unprecedented deployment of U.S. forces to defend against Iranian missile attacks against Israel undermines Israel’s long-held contention at the heart of U.S.-Israel strategic cooperation — that the conventional arsenal supplied by the U.S. to Israel, or QME, enables it to “defend itself by itself.” The consequences of this critical Israeli dependence upon Washington's direct military engagement remain to be seen.
Andy Bacevich, co-founder of the Quincy Institute, Boston University: No real change will occur in the U.S.-Israeli relationship as long as President Biden remains in the White House. What has changed over the past year are popular American attitudes toward Israel. Israel's "right to defend itself" cannot offer an adequate moral justification for the brutal punishment inflicted on the Palestinian people. Many Americans had grown accustomed to seeing the Arab-Israeli conflict as a contest between an innocent party and a guilty one. Events in Gaza and Lebanon have demolished that formulation once and for all.
Daniel Bessner, University of Washington: It's far too early to tell whether Israel's assault on Gaza has changed the U.S.-Israel relationship. On one hand, there's been unprecedented youth criticism of Israel and the "uncommitted" campaign indicates that in several important swing states unquestioning U.S. support for Israel might become a significant liability. On the other hand, the United States is a gerontocracy whose most important leaders were politicized in an era when Israel was viewed as, in effect, a post-Holocaust gift to international Jewry, and to criticize it was to in some real sense align with anti-semites. That is to say, nothing will really change until the current generation of leaders gives way to younger politicians who came of age in a different moment, something that isn't exactly in the offing.
Dan DePetris, Defense Priorities: It's quite clear that the last year of war hasn’t changed much of anything in the U.S.-Israel relationship. U.S. officials may be more vocal about their disagreements with Israeli policies and more willing to confront their Israeli counterparts rhetorically. But the actual policy doesn’t match the rhetoric. The U.S. is still effectively enabling Israel to escalate even as it calls for regional de-escalation. It continues to sell large munitions and offensive weapons to Israel unconditionally while at the same time begging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to sign a ceasefire deal in Gaza and make peace in Lebanon. It remains virtually nonchalant, even as Israel, the junior partner in the relationship, pursues highly risky strategies that could eventually blowback on U.S. forces in the Middle East. The U.S. isn’t incapable of reforming the relationship — it’s unwilling.
Robert Hunter, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO: America will continue rock-solid support for Israel’s security: It’s deep in U.S. culture. Further, Israel’s perspective on the Middle East continues dominating the narrative in U.S. society, politics, most think-tanks, and main- stream media. Thus without serious blow-back in Washington, Israel managed to kill the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, while thwarting U.S. efforts to reduce tensions with Teheran; and President Biden is able to give Israel near-total support, in practice though not words, for its military actions in Gaza and Lebanon.
But the human toll of today’s multi-faceted conflict has raised questions about the terms of U.S. support for Israel’s actions. There is erosion of initial sympathy for Israel’s response to Hamas’ horrendous slaughter last October 7. Some incalculable portion of younger Americans is less committed to virtual carte blanche for Israel’s leaders. Yet however U.S. domestic politics develop, they — more than U.S. interests — will shape America’s regional policies.