Evidence keeps piling up that the bipartisan consensus on US support for Israel is dead. Signs appear almost daily that Israeli behaviour and the pro-Israel lobby’s heavy-handed tactics for browbeating elected officials into unquestioning support for Israel are being rejected by both Democratic voters and elected officials. Events this past week make this clear.
Even Democrats vying for the presidency are demonstrating their willingness to establish independence from the old pro-Israel consensus. Gone are the days when a candidate would make the obligatory pilgrimage to Israel to meet the prime minister, hug victims of Arab violence, and visit the Wailing Wall. Now they compete to show just how critical they can be.
Rahm Emanuel, a long-time fixture in US politics and supporter of Israel, travelled to Tel Aviv to deliver a highly publicised speech sharply critical of Israeli policy. His speech was overshadowed by Congressman Ro Khanna who was detained and harassed by armed Israeli settlers while visiting the West Bank. Khanna’s Press coverage eclipsed Emanuel’s speech.
As potential presidential contenders, Emanuel and Khanna’s choices to make these visits and criticisms part of their opening volleys speak volumes about where Democrats are on this issue.
Back in Washington, two congressional votes added further weight to the case that there is change. A united front of Senate Democrats blocked a Republican effort, supported by Israel, to merge US and Israeli military and intelligence co-operation. By replacing aid to Israel with guaranteed co-operation and co-production of military equipment, it would’ve eliminated the ability of future US administrations to limit unacceptable use of US military supplies.
Concurrently, the House of Representatives voted on an amendment to the National Defence Authorisation Act to cut the annual $3.3 billion US aid package to Israel. This measure was supported by a slight majority of Democratic House members. More revealing than the final tally was the run-up to the vote.
The amendment eliminating annual aid to Israel had been introduced by a Republican member who lost his primary contest after a $12 million outlay from pro-Israel sources. That the Republican Speaker of the House allowed the amendment to come to a vote made some Democrats wary that it was a trap intended to hurt Democrats with pro-Israel donors and Jewish voters.
When faced with controversial votes, the party’s congressional leadership takes charge to mobilise their members’ votes. Because the Democratic House leader had just received a substantial contribution from pro-Israel sources to support Democrats in November, it was assumed he’d urge members to vote against the amendment. Instead, recognising the party’s deep divide, he announced that he’d vote against the aid cut, but other Democratic legislators were free to vote their conscience. Equally telling, the number two House Democrat and former Democratic leader both voted for the amendment to cut aid.
In speeches explaining their votes against the aid, most expressed outrage at Israel’s behaviours, saying the US shouldn’t be complicit in what Israel was doing in Gaza. Others cited disgust with the Israeli Prime Minister. Many members voting for the amendment noted that the money going to Israel to kill Palestinians could better be spent domestically to support schools, heathcare and other priorities.
These arguments couldn’t have been made even a few years ago. While public opinion, especially among Democrats, has long been critical of Israeli policies, only a handful of elected officials would speak out. Those upset with Israeli behaviour didn’t dare voice their concerns publicly or vote contrary to the pro-Israel lobby’s wishes. A few factors account for this change.
First, voters watched the mass killings of Palestinians and devastation of Gaza in real time on social media platforms, unfiltered by establishment media pundits or political propagandists.
Equally important: voters are feeling rebellious. Both Republicans and Democrats are rejecting their establishments. That’s why Trump won over a majority of Republicans, and why Democrats are turning their backs on party elites and big money interests who’ve dominated their politics for decades. Rejecting AIPAC, ‘dark money’, and the taboo against criticising Israel are part of this shift.
Change came slowly, but not before too many careers were destroyed and too many innocents lost their lives. We’re in a different place today and it’s important we recognise it.
Dr James Zogby
&uuid=(email))