At least for now, the worst-case scenario for Israel has been averted. The decision by the Biden administration to veto
a U.N. Security Council resolution that would have mandated an
immediate and unconditional ceasefire in the Gaza Strip was a setback
for Hamas, as well as its allies and enablers in the international
community. Had it passed, it would have prevented Israel from continuing
efforts to mop up the remnants of the terror group and allowed Hamas to
reassert control over parts of the area from which it launched the
massacre in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
As important as that may be, what is
uncertain is whether the motivations behind the veto will be reflected
in the stands Democrats take in the coming years. With the party forced
to ponder why exactly the voters rejected them in the 2024 election,
both moderates and left-wingers are accusing each other of being to
blame for the triumph of President-elect Donald Trump and the incoming
GOP majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
It may be just one among many issues that
will be part of the 2024 post-mortem debate. But their attitude towards
Israel will be one of the key indications determining whether Democrats
continue to drift to the left or move back to the center as they try to
return to power.
No stab in the back
The American veto was contrary to the
expectations of many in the pro-Israel community who feared that the
lame-duck administration of President Joe Biden would stab the Jewish
state in the back in much the same manner as did his old boss, former
President Barack Obama. In December of 2016 with only a few weeks left
in his term of office, Obama had ordered his U.N. ambassador not to veto
a resolution that effectively branded the Jewish presence in much of
Jerusalem, and Judea and Samaria, as illegal.
The current resolution, which had the
support of every one of the 10 non-permanent members of the UNSC
(Algeria, Ecuador, Guyana, Japan, Malta, Mozambique, Sierra Leone,
Slovenia, South Korea and Switzerland) as well as the four other
permanent members (the United Kingdom, Russia, France and China). But
Washington had insisted that any ceasefire resolution must also
explicitly state that the remaining 101 hostages still being held by
Hamas somewhere in the Gaza Strip be released. The vetoed resolution
mentioned the hostages but their theoretical release would have only
come after Israel had been forced to stop its military pressure on
Hamas. That would have guaranteed that their suffering would continue
indefinitely and give the terrorists more leverage to demand more
far-reaching Israeli concessions to secure the release of those captives
who remain alive.
The veto might be a sign of an
administration that—although it has been talking out of both sides of
its mouth about the post-Oct. 7 war with Iran’s terror proxies—is still
not ready to completely abandon Israel. Biden’s team of Obama alumni
bitterly resents the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,
who has courageously ignored most of their advice in the last year as he
pursued victory over Hamas in the south and Hezbollah to the north.
Many Democrats, including some inside the government as well as in
Congress, were hoping for the administration to vent that resentment by
letting a deeply prejudiced anti-Israel majority at the United Nations
force Israel to let Hamas survive. The veto may well be an indication
that even in the Biden White House, there is an understanding that
punishing Israel for defending itself is immoral and against the
strategic interests of the United States.
But with many questioning who is really in
charge in Washington as an aging and visibly declining Biden seems
increasingly detached from policy debates, it may also be a sign of the
confusion and policy stasis that is inevitable in an essentially
leaderless government.
Whatever the reason, the consequences of that decision shouldn’t be underestimated.
Had Biden let the current ceasefire
resolution pass, it would have encouraged a triumphant Hamas to make
good on its promises to inflict more barbaric Oct. 7-style horrors on
Israelis. Yet barring a change of heart in the next two months (a
possibility that can’t be discounted) before President-elect Donald
Trump takes office, that danger has been averted.
In doing so, the administration has given
some comfort to those who have not given up hope that a bipartisan
pro-Israel consensus might be preserved.
Progressives embrace Hamas propaganda
Such hope has come under serious strain in
the 13 months since the war on Hamas and other Iranian proxies began
after Oct. 7. Democrats—most particularly, Biden and Vice President
Kamala Harris—sought to balance their need to avoid alienating
pro-Israel voters with a desire to avoid distancing the growing
intersectional anti-Israel faction among Democrats. This faction, made
up of not just the radicals of the far-left “Squad” in the House but of
many of those who label themselves as “progressives,” has embraced Hamas
propaganda about Israel committing war crimes and even the big lie
about “genocide” in Gaza.
That’s the impetus for the push for Senate
resolutions proposed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), whose goal was to
prevent the transfer of offensive weapons from the United States to
Israel. As the comments of those prominent Democrats and anti-Israeli
groups that supported the measures indicated, the support for a
ceasefire in Gaza on humanitarian grounds has morphed into an acceptance
of the big lies spread by Israel’s enemies about Netanyahu pursuing
“genocide” by deliberately seeking to starve Palestinians as well as the
“indiscriminate” killings of civilians.
These charges have been refuted by those
who have observed how scrupulous the Israel Defense Forces have been in
trying to avoid civilian deaths. Jerusalem has also allowed humanitarian
aid to flow continuously to Palestinians into Gaza, including areas
controlled by Hamas, which steals the food and supplies for their own
use. The claims about “genocide” and Israeli war crimes once only heard
from radicals are now being voiced by more mainstream Democrats.
Given the overwhelming support for Israel
among Republicans and the fact that many Democrats and the White House
opposed it, Sanders’s effort never had a chance to pass even in a Senate
still run by Biden’s party until it changes hands in January. But 19
Democrats, including some supposedly non-radicals like Sens. Dick Durban
(D-Ill.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Brian Schatz (D-Ha.) and Jon Ossoff
(D-Ga.)—Schatz, Ossoff and Sanders are Jewish—joined with Senate
left-wingers in seeking to disarm Israel.
The defeat of Sanders’s resolutions will,
like the UNSC resolution, also be touted by pro-Israel Democrats as
proof that the party has not abandoned the Jewish state. Still, the fact
that so many Democrats were prepared to accept the misinformation about
Israel’s actions promoted by antisemitic groups and others who are
doing the bidding of Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah in the United States is
telling. It provides further evidence of the way that their party is
increasingly divided about support for the Jewish state and ensuring the
safety of American Jews under siege from leftists calling for Israel’s
destruction and violence against Jews everywhere.
As indicated in an article by Jonathan Weisman, deputy Washington editor of The New York Times and
an inveterate Israel-basher, the Democrats’ stand on Israel and the
post-Oct. 7 surge in antisemitism will be tested again before long. The
unwillingness of many Democrats to vote for the Anti-Semitism Awareness
Act—geared to ensure that the federal government uses the International
Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition
of Jew-hatred when seeking to combat its spread on college campuses—is
another indication of the effort to steer it further to the left.
Though outgoing Majority Leader Chuck
Schumer (D-N.Y.) has sought to postpone a vote on the act, he finally
agreed to let it come to the Senate floor this week by tying it to
another bill. Schumer’s own hypocritical betrayal of Jewish students was
exposed by a House investigation of antisemitism at campuses like Columbia University.
Some 70 progressive Democrats and 21 GOP
House members (including Attorney General nominee Matt Gaetz) opposed
it, though the Republicans did so out of a mistaken belief that its
language identified Christian beliefs along with efforts to compare
Israel to the Nazis as evidence of antisemitism. But many Democrats and
the vast majority of Republicans will likely back it. Nevertheless, the
debate within both parties about combating antisemitism and refusing to
betray Israel signifies a lot about the future of American politics.
Election post-mortem
As is usually the case with election loss
post-mortems, Democrats were quick to form a circular firing squad as
both moderates and leftists sought to assign blame for Harris’s loss on
their intra-party rivals, the candidate herself, Biden and anyone else
they could think of.
Centrists want the party to free itself of
the burden of defending radical ideologies like gender theory, critical
race theory and intersectionality. Along with the party’s shift towards
being the home of credentialed elites and its contempt for the working
class, these toxic ideas have done much to tarnish the Democratic brand.
Left-wingers have spent the weeks since
the election not just mourning Trump’s victory but accusing the half of
the country that voted for him of being fascists, racists and
misogynists. They want to double down on ideology, and blame Biden and
Harris for being too centrist. In particular, they believe that the
ambivalent policy towards Israel’s war on Islamist terrorists alienated
young voters and others who might have turned out to support a party
that embraced the Palestinian myth about Gaza genocide, Israeli war
crimes and many other related issues.
This is deeply foolish since there were
always more pro-Israel votes in the center to be lost by Harris’s
inability to fully condemn the pro-Hamas mobs than on the antisemitic
left, where left-wing extremists and Muslim Americans were demanding a
more anti-Israel stand.
The logic of American politics dictates
that Democrats will return to power when they shuck off the yoke of
radicals. Doing otherwise is political malpractice and a gift to a GOP
now faced with the challenge of governing. As Democrats face four years
of a Trump 2.0 administration that is as pro-Israel as his first, the
temptation to oppose everything he does may well shift even more in the
party to the left as well as bolster the ranks of anti-Israel
progressives.
For now, at least, in the halls of the
United Nations and Congress, Israel can still count on some support from
Democrats. But if a bipartisan pro-Israel consensus is increasingly a
thing of the past, the threat comes almost entirely from a growing
left-wing faction of the Democrats. The fate of that party, in addition
to hopes to maintain support for the Jewish state on both sides of the
aisle, may well hang on whether Israel-bashers continue to gain ground
or are banished by responsible Democrats to the fever swamps of the far
left, where they belong.
No comments:
Post a Comment