On March 25, during a UN Security Council discussion, the United States did something highly unusual: It abstained from a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The US had vetoed similar resolutions in the past, arguing that it would not permit any measure to pass that might impede Israel’s right to “self-defence” and that did not explicitly link a ceasefire to the release of all Israeli hostages from Palestinian custody.
Fall out of US abstention at UNSC
Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, immediately pronounced the US abstention a deplorable “retreat” from the unstinting support that Israel has received from the onset of the present iteration of a long-standing conflict between Palestinians and Israel. As a mark of his displeasure, indeed of his alleged surprise that the US should in any way be signifying a shift in its position of unfettered support towards Israel, Netanyahu cancelled a planned visit by an Israeli delegation to the US to discuss Israel’s planned invasion of Rafah.
Many commentators point to the US vote of abstention, as well as other recent developments such as criticism of Netanyahu by US Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer and his call for elections in Israel — angrily dismissed by Netanyahu in a sharply-worded rejoinder, “We are not a banana republic” — as significant milestones in what is being characterised as an evolving relationship between Israel and the US. The Guardian’s diplomatic, for instance, described the American decision to abstain as marking “another moment in the painful, almost anguished US diplomatic distancing from its chief ally in the Middle East.”
A lot seems to have changed
The terrain appears to have shifted quickly and considerably in the last several weeks: Having vetoed UN Security Council resolutions thrice, the US was doubtless finding that it, too, was repeatedly being pushed alongside Israel into being part of a minuscule minority. Tensions have been rising between Israel and the US over the pace and scope of humanitarian aid, especially in the face of the imminent starvation of Palestinians on a large scale. Most recently, the death of seven aid workers from the World Central Kitchen in a reportedly targeted strike by the Israel Defence Force (IDF) has ratcheted up the American pressure against Israel.
Might one conclude, then, that something significant has altered in the special relationship that Israel has enjoyed with the US since its founding? Reportedly, even as these lines are being penned, and following on what has been described as a tense call between Biden and Netanyahu, Israel has finally succumbed to the US pressure to open up new aid routes to Gaza. There is ample reason to think that American frustration with Israeli intransigence has been growing and some suspect that Israel may no longer enjoy unconditional support in the United Nations and more broadly the court of world public opinion. Moreover, the brute fact is that in an electoral democracy, political parties are subject to the vagaries of shifting voter sentiments. The more “progressive” sections within the Democratic party have been arguing that arms sales to Israel must be tied to the immediate cessation of hostilities and much higher standards of accountability on the part of Israel. University campuses have been rocked by unrest over the Biden administration’s policies; more importantly, both recent polls and Democratic primaries being held in the run-up to the presidential election in November suggest that Biden is in grave danger of losing the support of Arab-American constituencies.
Yet, not much has changed
I would argue, however, that analyses which portend a significant shift in the US support of Israel are not merely premature but have failed to capture the pulse that animates the US-Israel relationship. Israel has, previous to this war, been the recipient of over $150 billion in American largesse, or something like $3.8 billion annually; it also has access to advanced American war technologies and weapon systems. If the pro-Palestinian demonstrators have appeared to make a splash on university campuses, it is only because the forces that lobby for both Jewish and Israeli interests have so long dominated the American university system that one barely heard of support for Palestine. The charge of anti-Semitism remains the most potent weapon that can be deployed on behalf of Israel. The indubitable fact is that Israel is held up, by Democrats and Republicans alike, not merely as the only real friend the US has in the Middle East but as the only democracy in the region.
It is immaterial to this argument whether Israel is, in fact, a “democracy”. The fact that some of its citizens have enjoyed liberties ordinarily associated with democratic states cannot obscure the other reality, that Israel has been an occupying power for decades and that Palestinians exist in a state of manifest and dire subjugation.
There is another and yet still more vital consideration. I have argued elsewhere that there is a certain synergy between Israel and the United States as settler-colonial states (‘In this together’, IE, December 21, 2023). A messianic spirit has long informed American self-perception and guided US foreign policy: As every post-World War II American president has declared at one time or the other, the belief that America is “the one indispensable nation” is intrinsic to American exceptionalism. Israel is far from having the gumption of saying the same explicitly about itself, but the state of Israel conducts itself with the supreme confidence that it exercises a moral purchase over the rest of humanity. It does so, of course, on the presumption that the murder of six million Jews gives the Jewish state of Israel a special place in history — and the unconstrained and unquestioned right to oppress others in the name of “self-defence”. Given this synergy, it is extremely doubtful that anything substantive has at all changed in the US-Israel relationship or is even likely to change soon.
The writer is professor of History, UCLA
The charge of anti-Semitism remains the most potent weapon that can be deployed on behalf of Israel
6
19
13.04.2024
On March 25, during a UN Security Council discussion, the United States did something highly unusual: It abstained from a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The US had vetoed similar resolutions in the past, arguing that it would not permit any measure to pass that might impede Israel’s right to “self-defence” and that did not explicitly link a ceasefire to the release of all Israeli hostages from Palestinian custody.
Fall out of US abstention at UNSC
Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, immediately pronounced the US abstention a deplorable “retreat” from the unstinting support that Israel has received from the onset of the present iteration of a long-standing conflict between Palestinians and Israel. As a mark of his displeasure, indeed of his alleged surprise that the US should in any way be signifying a shift in its position of unfettered support towards Israel, Netanyahu cancelled a planned visit by an Israeli delegation to the US to discuss Israel’s planned invasion of Rafah.
Many commentators point to the US vote of abstention, as well as other recent developments such as criticism of Netanyahu by US Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer and his call for elections in Israel — angrily dismissed by Netanyahu in a sharply-worded rejoinder, “We are not a banana republic” — as significant milestones in what is being characterised as an evolving relationship between Israel and the US. The Guardian’s diplomatic, for instance, described the American........
© Indian Express
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
