WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden expressed support Friday for Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer after the senator called for new elections in Israel, the latest sign that the U.S. relationship with its closest Middle East ally is careening toward fracture over the war in Gaza.
Schumer, a Jewish Democrat from New York, sent tremors through both countries this week when he said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has “lost his way” and warned that “Israel cannot survive if it becomes a pariah” as Palestinian casualties continue to grow.
“He made a good speech,” Biden said in the Oval Office during a meeting with Ireland’s prime minister. “I think he expressed serious concerns shared not only by him but by many Americans.”
Probably, but it makes your dinner a bit more spicy on a Friday evening to have a leading Jewish Democrat ask for it (because it’s a completely reasonable ask at the current time).
If Bibi isn’t reelected three thing seem likely:
Fingers crossed!
I really hate this framing. Israel’s response has not been in Israel’s self interest. There is approximately 0% chance they will defeat Hamas, and approximately 100% chance they have hardended militant anti-Israel sentiment among Gazans for a generation. Further, they have alienated all of their potential regional allies (just as relations were starting to normalize), which is terrible for their long term security prospects in general; and their ability to resolve the Gaza problem in particular (since an ally that Gazan’s can trust would be incredibly useful).
Further, Hamas is not Israel’s biggest threat by far. They spent years planning an attack that only succeeded because of a massive failure on the part of the IDF; and only lasted for a day before the IDF completely steamrolled them.
As we can see know (and has been obvious from the beginning), Hezbolla in Lebanon is much greater military threat. Prior to the war, they were constrained by their rational self interest of avoiding a full war with Israel. In the beginning of the war, they made some pro-forma attacks, to which Israel offered some pro-forma responses; but things along the Israel Lebanon border were relatively quiet, because neither sude really wanted a war. However, as Israel continued its operation in Gaza, the political pressures in Lebanon grew, forcing an escallation of the conflict their. At this point, excluding the initial attack most of the damage to Israel has come not from Gaza, but Lebanon; and the IDF cannot just steamroll them.
And Israel is still in the “good case” of escalation. The elephant in the room here is Iran. As far as I can tell, Iran is not happy about this level of conflict, and is actively trying to avoid getting drawn in. However, it cannot simply abandon its proxies without massive loss of regional power. Nor can it be seen to abandon Gaza without significant internal political problems. The longer this war goes on, the greater the risk of Iran being fully dragged into it. If that happens, then everything up to this point will look like childs play. Israel will probably survive, but for the first time in decades, that will be brought into question.
None of this is new. This is the exact dynamic that was in play on October 6, when Israel’s actions were fully consistent with being aware of this dynamic. When October 7th happened, it did give Israel a bit more leeway to operate in Gaza; but that has always been limited, and has been long exhausted. Now, the dynamics are effectively the same as on October 6, but Israel is making the other decision of actively poking the bear of a regional war insted of simply tiptoeing around it as they had been doing. And Israel’s security suffers greatly for it.
Hamas is already mostly defeated. And the war will not end until it is fully defeated. Hamas’s continued existence is not part of any peace plan or ceasefire.
Hamas can surrender, destroy the tunnels, and free the hostages, and then the bombs will stop. Not before. Bet.
How did the war on terror go? Oh, it created MORE terrorists? Right…
ironically, the war against anger only managed to create more
I’m pretty sure this is the first time I’ve ever heard of an elected Jewish leader call out any sitting Israeli leader.
Ah you can always rely on Bernie. He’s obviously not as senior as Schumer but he called it first.
My bad.
Oh not at all! I wasn’t calling you out in any way. My first instinct was the same as yours and then I thought “Wait…What about Bernie?” but I had to google it.
It’s all good. I should have remembered Bernie.
On the other hand, Schumer is 100% AIPAC approved. For him to come out means a lot.
Definitely. And no offense to Bernie, because he’s an absolute gentleman, but if we’re honest it means more for Schumer to.
Not at all. Bernie isn’t a Democrat, but he caucuses (allies in chambers) with them. He has the latitude to float trial policy balloons and gague how the electorate responds before the party commits to a position. Bernie is a perfect stalking horse for the Dems because he can say the “radical” stuff out loud without scaring off the Wall Street donors.
Am I saying he’s a cat’s paw for the DNC? No! Not by a long shot. He’s progressive though, and is a great pathfinder for new ideas that resonate with a nebulous and fickle bloc of voters. In these times, his constituency are solely needed at the polls.
Yes, it’s mercenary. These are Interesting Times.
You could argue that running for President on the Democratic ticket makes him a de facto Dem.
And “may you live in interesting times” is supposedly an old Asian curse.
I’m not disagreeing, but he’s still (I-VT). What I am saying is there’s most likely a rugged utility in that both sides recognize.
Yup. Interesting times, indeed.
Yes, but will Bibi go to jail before Trump does?
That’s a race I can get behind!