Opinion

As the US-Israel relationship is questioned, its ‘shared fictions’ remain strong

Tom Friedman created minor shockwaves when he wrote the Biden administration is "reassessing" the U.S.-Israeli relationship, but actual U.S. policy remains committed to Israel and the "shared fiction" that the occupation is temporary .

Earlier this week, there was a somewhat odd moment of insecurity in the usually harmonious U.S.-Israeli relationship.

On Wednesday afternoon, Axios’ Middle East correspondent in Washington felt the need to tweet that a White House National Security Council spokesperson told him that “There is no talk of some kind of formal reassessment’ of relations with the Israeli government.” 

At around the same time, Israeli President Isaac Herzog was telling reporters that the relationship between the United States and Israel is “above and beyond any and all disagreements” and that the “alliance between Israel and the United States is unbreakable and irreplaceable.”

Why did both American and Israeli officials feel the need to so staunchly reaffirm the U.S.-Israel relationship at this moment? The answer was found in the opinion pages of the New York Times

In his column Tuesday, Times pundit Thomas Friedman published a piece titled, “The U.S. Reassessment of Netanyahu’s Government Has Begun.” That’s what caused the tumult.

It’s not a very good piece. It gets plenty wrong, is poorly written, and has some truly horrifying points, but that’s separate from the effect that the piece — or, more precisely, the headline — had in both Washington and Jerusalem. 

There’s really no reason it should have shaken things up so much. The piece was purely speculative and made no claim to any insider knowledge. Friedman was just offering his take on what’s happening now. But in both the U.S. and Israel, Friedman is widely read, and even when he doesn’t base his writing on inside knowledge (something he has a lot less of these days than he used to), many of Israel’s supporters still pay attention.

Reassessment without consequences

The idea that a “reassessment” might be taking place is overblown. Despite Israel severely damaging its own standing in the eyes of many of its liberal supporters with its “judicial reform” that seeks to disempower its own judicial system, the White House, State Department, and Congress have all remained steadfast in their support. Indeed, as Friedman indirectly notes, that support remains in place despite Israel’s increasingly insulting and arrogant behavior, even relative to its usual hubris, toward the Biden administration. And, while we have come to expect utter indifference to Israeli assaults and killings of Palestinians, there has been growing discomfort among liberal Democrats over Israel’s increasing aggression in the West Bank.

Friedman’s concern over a possible reassessment by the U.S. stems from a few things. President Joe Biden has pointedly refused to arrange a visit to Washington for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The outgoing Ambassador to Israel, Tom Nides, who has exceeded all diplomatic propriety in his concern for Israeli interests during his term, has talked about working to prevent Israel from “going off the rails.” And, to really set off the alarm bells, Biden himself, in an interview with Fareed Zakaria, made the self-evident statement that this was the “most extreme” Israeli government in history. Itamar Ben-Gvir, the most extreme of the extremists in the Knesset, said in response that Biden “needs to realize that we are no longer a star on the American flag.”

It’s easy to understand why Friedman might talk of a “reassessment,” and there is some merit to his thinking. Both Biden and his Secretary of State have, throughout their careers, shown a deep attachment to Israel and a cruel indifference to the well-being, the lives, and the very humanity of Palestinians. Yet even they are being sorely tested by Israel right now, as are many Americans, Jewish and non-Jewish, who have defended Israel on the basis of liberal values of democracy, the rule of law, and equal rights. These have, of course, always been illusory platforms on which to stand, but in the past, Israel always did just enough, often just cosmetically or rhetorically, for the overwhelming majority of people who don’t follow this issue closely to believe that Israel was basically a flawed democracy.

That charade is over. Israel no longer maintains that pretense and those who remain in passionate lock-step with it do not try to make that case. They simply argue that Palestinians deserve what they get, Israel is entitled to behave this way, and if you disagree, you simply hate Jews. A quick look at the responses on Twitter to me or anyone else advocating for Palestinian rights, let alone any actual Palestinians, makes this clear. 

Much has rightly been made of the Gallup poll in March that showed a marked shift in Democratic sympathies, which now leaned distinctly toward the Palestinians for the first time. But it’s more than just the polls. Israel’s draconian treatment of the Palestinians in Gaza, Jenin, and in Jerusalem has been on full display over the past year more widely than ever. It only makes sense that Tom Friedman would conclude that the Biden administration is reassessing the terms of its relationship with Israel.

In this vein, the invitation to Israeli President Isaac Herzog to address a joint session of Congress is telling. With the buzz around the lack of any invitation to Netanyahu remaining in the air, Friedman’s description of this invitation was striking. “It is Biden’s way of signaling that his problem is not with the Israeli people but with Bibi’s extremist cabinet,” the pundit wrote.

The choice of words there was not random. U.S. presidents and diplomats have often argued that their quarrels are with the “government of” a particular country — Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Russia — and not with its people. Friedman, in choosing those words, implicitly illustrates a serious decline in Israel’s standing in Washington. 

But that’s where Friedman is exaggerating, and he himself even seems to realize it. He writes, “I am not talking about a reassessment of our military and intelligence cooperation with Israel, which remains strong and vital. I am talking about our basic diplomatic approach to an Israel that is unabashedly locking in a one-state solution: a Jewish state only, with the fate and rights of the Palestinians T.B.D.”

Of course, if aid to Israel and military and intelligence cooperation are not threatened, Israel is not apt to be too concerned. Even in the unlikely event that the United States diminishes its support for Israel at the United Nations, that would just mean that Israel would need to ignore more UN resolutions than it already does. 

A relationship built on ‘shared fictions’

Also telling is what Friedman sees as the divergence of U.S. and Israeli interests. The “shared interest” Friedman focuses on is, bizarrely, what he describes as “the shared fiction that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank was only temporary and one day there could be a two-state solution with the 2.9 million Palestinians there.”

Israel, he says, is destroying that “shared fiction.” In truth, Israel has been undermining that fiction all along, from the day the occupation began 56 years ago. In more recent years, Israel has been aggressively shredding it, moving not just to quietly undermine a two-state solution, but to “crush” aspirations of a Palestinian state, as Netanyahu recently put it at a meeting of his cabinet.

But more importantly, that “shared fiction” is not a “shared interest,” it’s a very harmful conspiracy. Friedman does a great service here in his description of this as “a fiction,” because the fact that it is fiction is the very heart of the problem. 

The occupation was never temporary. Israel made a decision early on, as far back as the plans drawn up by then-Minister of Labor, and soon-to-be Deputy Prime Minister Yigal Allon in July 1967, to absorb parts or all of the West Bank. For 56 years, Israel has danced about, building settlements, strangling the Palestinian economy; confiscating Palestinian land; harassing, assaulting, and killing the Palestinian populace; and all the while working with the United States to maintain the fiction that it would one day withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza. 

Israel maintained that fiction while it annexed East Jerusalem, while it annexed the Golan Heights, and when it worked with U.S. President George W. Bush to declare that it would never have to return to its internationally recognized borders as they existed before June 1967. It’s been a valuable fiction, supporting the strategy of increased dispossession of Palestinians and creeping annexation of the West Bank. Israel is displaying astounding recklessness and foolishness by tossing it away, and it’s easy to see how difficult that makes things for the United States. 

Friedman has all of that right, even if his wistful nostalgia for the “shared fiction” is morally reprehensible. But his conclusion that this is leading to a “reassessment” is off base. The invitation for Herzog to speak to a joint session of Congress is unprecedented in that it is an invitation for a figurehead head of state who is at odds with the leader of his own government. Yet, though it was issued by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, it was supported by the current House Speaker, Republican Kevin McCarthy. That gives it a lot of congressional weight. 

Moreover, while Biden has made a few critical statements, the daily charade of White House and State Department spokespeople covering for one Israeli crime after another has proceeded unabated and Israel continues to face absolutely no material pressure from Washington to change its behavior. Meanwhile, Reps. Ilhan Omar and Jamaal Bowman will continue to be called antisemitic for their decision, which they are thus far alone in (though it seems likely Rashida Tlaib and maybe a few others will join them), to boycott Herzog’s address. There seems little chance of a “reassessment” on Capitol Hill. 

Like the protesters objecting to Netanyahu’s efforts to destroy the Israeli judicial system, the only concerns being expressed by any branch of the U.S. government are based on concerns for Israel’s well-being and the maintenance of the “shared fiction” that there is any effort to end Israeli domination of the Palestinians. There remains a “shared value” between the U.S. and Israel that Palestinian lives are worth nothing and that Palestinians do not deserve basic rights. As long as that’s in place, there really isn’t anything to “reassess.”

13 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The mere fact that they’ve “leaked” out to Axios that there have been no “talks” of any official reassessment of relations, means that there absolutely HAS been talks in the White House about reassessing the current relationship. This was a very pointed message for the Israeli government.

Besides, how could there possibly not be “talk” about reassessing the current relationship?

Firstly, the current lack of any sort of invite for Netanyahu, and when/if he’ll even be invited at all right now has obviously been the subject of MANY meetings and “talks” in the White House. An official invite (or lack thereof) to ANY foreign leader is not something Jill Biden does on her own, on a whim, and in her spare time. It’s a massive technical, scheduling, logistical, security, and political undertaking involving multiple stakeholders in the administration.

Then, from a mere national security aspect alone, you have a nuclear armed nation openly lurching into far right-wing uncheck ultra-religious supremacist fundamentalism. A nuclear armed nation and government that has also been openly threatening to attack Iran and launch the entire region into outright war and chaos. If there is anyone who believes that alone hasn’t garnered “talk” and “assessments” regarding the US/Israel relationship, then I have shiny little bridge to Brooklyn to sell them.

Make no mistake. Friedman’s piece, as flawed as it was in places, was a semi-official shot across the bow of the current Israeli regime, coded in much the same language and hasbara speak you hear US officials use when trying to publicly chide Israel and its representatives without “officially” and openly criticizing them.

Take it as fact. The message WAS sent and it WAS received, and the Axios reporting, was the “good cop” line to the NYT’s “bad cop” line, designed to sugar coat it for the US based audience at AIPAC and the donor class.

The real question is what Netanyahu and his ilk plan to do with the message.

You may recall that one of Sherlock Holmes stories centers around the fact that a dog did not bark in the night ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventure_of_Silver_Blaze :

Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?
Holmes: To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.
Gregory: The dog did nothing in the night-time.
Holmes: That was the curious incident. )

In the case of Friedman’s latest editorial in the New York Times the dog that did not bark is Gaza: there isn’t one mention of the 2 million residents of Gaza anywhere in his piece. Israel’s Hasbara machine has apparently convinced the world that Israel has nothing whatsoever to do with Gaza, as if Gaza is a separate country or a canton of Switzerland.

1 of 2

fic·tion| ˈfikSH(ə)n | 
noun 

Something that is invented or untrue: a belief or statement that is false but is often held to be true because it is expedient to do so.

Friedman’s article sparked a panic among Zionists and their minions in Washington and Tel Aviv because he dared to say the quiet part out loud. After a lifetime of coy disingenuousness he finally found the courage to admit the truth in what the Palestinians have been saying out loud for decades: That there is not now and there was never going to be a genuine “Two State Solution”.

2SS was and is just a fiction. A lie. A blatant deceit meant to allow Zionism to carry out its ultra-nationalistic annexation obsession.

But let’s not rush to give Friedman all the credit for accidental honesty since there were other Zionists who also let the cat out of the bag either because they were indifferent to American sensibilities or, more likely, contemptuous of them. 

The late Ariel Sharon, whose hubris knew no bounds, was in favor of the “Pastrami Sandwich” approach to occupation and annexation which this famous poster by the artist Rajie Cook captures perfectly:

“We’ll make a pastrami sandwich of them. We’ll insert a strip of Jewish settlement in between the Palestinians and another strip of Jewish settlement right across the West Bank so that in 25 years’ time neither the U.N. nor the U.S., nobody will be able to tear it apart.”

And let’s not forget the full frontal arrogance of Moshe Dayan, Menachem Begin’s outspoken Minister of Foreign Affairs who said that Jewish settlements in the Occupied Territories were essential:

“…not because they can ensure security better than the army, but because without them we cannot keep the army in those territories. Without them the IDF would be a foreign army ruling a foreign population.”

No real “reassessment” is likely to take place because American political Zionism is sufficiently armored such that it can absorb an unfortunate slip of the tongue by a long-obsequious proxy like Friedman: what it cannot endure – and this is the whole point of both Friedman’s article and the notion of a White House re-evaluation of Israel’s usefulness – is a possible change in the US commitment to the “shared fictions” that the emergent Ben Gvir-Smotrich junta portends. 

The murmur of a “reassessment” has not arisen, to be sure, because Biden or any of Zionism’s other trained puppets wouldn’t gladly continue to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to the obscene injustices Zionism imposes on Palestinian on a daily, nay, hourly basis. No, they are good with that. 

(Cont.)

IN A SLIGHTLY MORE OPTIMISTIC VEIN: 
Thomas Friedman is one step closer to abandoning Zionism | By Nasim Ahmed | July 12, 2023
LINK – https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20230712-thomas-friedman-is-one-step-closer-to-abandoning-zionism/

P.S. CORI BUSH (TWITTER, 7:16 PM · Jul 13, 2023): The Israeli government is responsible for enforcing an apartheid state and rampantly abusing the rights of Palestinians. 
Congress should not be giving a platform to the President of a country that shows no respect for human rights.
I will not be attending his joint address.


2 of 2

What the White House is signaling, and what Friedman is attempting to telegraph, is that the implosion of Israel’s deeply flawed democracy will strip the White House, Congress, both political parties, the MSM and perhaps the entire galaxy of American apologists who have been carrying water for Israel since at least 1967 of the indispensable, near-sacred, irreplaceable and it must be said, only rhetorical response they have ever been able to muster to defend Israel’s indefensible policies and actions: that the Occupation was temporary, annexation was not an option the 2SS is best and only way to bring about peace. Without that they are … naked.

Back in the day Sharon did not believe in the 2SS. Neither did Dayan. Today Ben Gvir, Smotrich and Netanyahu do not embrace this “shared fiction” and since they are now both the elected leadership of Israel and the architects of its most existential crisis why would anyone expect the US government to continue to promote policy the Israelis openly, officially, proudly…reject?

Imagine the day when poor, pathetic White House spokesperson Mathew Miller has to answer questions about the caught-on-video implosion of the Israeli government and the official announcement delivered in the Knesset that the “Two State Solution is now and forever a dead letter in the eyes of the Israeli government. Judaea and Samaria are officially annexed to the State of Israel.” Words to that effect.

Change, Friedman seems to be hinting, is in the air. Ben Gvir & Co. seem to be utterly committed to bringing it about just as rapidly as possible, with little-to-no regard for how Biden, Congress or the American people feel or what damage it does to the “special relationship”. 

Ben Gvir, who is enamored of the late Zionist fascist Meir Kahane said recently that Biden “needs to realize that we are no longer a star on the American flag.” 

Hark! I hear a vast, international chorus singing: “Oh, if only that were true!” 

Question for Any Zionist: Was it antisemitic according to IHRA for Tom Friedman to suggest that the US and Israel have been engaged in a near-six decades long charade meant to deceive the American people about Israel’s true intentions vis-à-vis the Palestinian people? Did his comments play into the racist stereotype of Israelis, Zionists and by extension, Jewish people as portrayed in the odious Protocols of the Elders of Zion as devious and untrustworthy? 

View here 312 Israeli-produced posters on the theme of the Israeli Judicial Reforms