US Support For Israel Also Means Criticism

President Obama’s historic trip to Cuba solidified a shift in the US-Cuban relationship toward one of economic diplomacy while giving the leaders of both Cold War foes a chance to open  air grievances in a face-to-face Press conference.  Obama’s would-be successors, however, were busy giving lip service to the powerful Jewish special interests at the pro-Israel AIPAC Conference.  Although even political rogue Donald Trump felt beholden to follow the political custom of coddling Israel, Bernie Sanders, who did not attend the conference, provided Israel with the blunt, yet evenhanded, criticism for its mistreatment of the Palestinian People that it desperately needs to survive. 
 
Despite declarations by US politicians to prioritize Israeli security above all other US interests in the Middle East, the simple truth is that Israel faces a growing threat the US cannot fight.  For those who truly care about the future of Israel, and the unique American-Israeli relationship, it is wise to accept the criticism of people like Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama.  The Obama Administration has been criticized for giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the cold shoulder, but the US needs to be able to criticize the policies of the Israeli government and the Israeli government needs to be criticized when it engages in destructive policies that create security threats. ​

The Peoples of the Middle East are globalizing in terms of developing a far-reaching Muslim identity while they are also democratizing in terms of demanding far more responsive governance.  In practice, this means more and more individuals throughout the region see the Palestinian People as their mistreated brothers and the overly aggressive, uncompromising Israeli government, and People, as the enemy.  It also means these uniting Muslim People are going to do more to address the mistreatment of the Palestinian Peoples while regional governments will be pressured to address those demands as well, which will be easier than addressing unmet domestic concerns.
 
Coupled with the threat of globalized terrorism, i.e. the Islamic State, Israel’s failure to resolve its conflict with the Palestinian People threatens the future of Israel.  Despite unwavering US political support, the Netanyahu government’s hardliner stance and impulse to engage in catastrophic acts of war against the Palestinians as a first resort unifies the world against Israel.   Unfortunately, Netanyahu used his latest reelection bid to further polarize the Israeli government against Muslims.  Recognizing the devastation caused by Israeli’s 2014 Operation Edge and his decision to follow up the conflict with the expansion of settlements, Netanyahu appears to have little interest in peace.   
 
Israel has long had an unfortunate tendency of deflecting criticism against its reaction to Hamas attacks and rationalizing even the most blatant disregard for the lives and wellbeing of innocent Palestinians who happen to find themselves in the middle of these two warring parties.  Israel is an insecure nation with powerful leaders who perceive their homelands under persistent threat.  When insecure leaders perceive a coming threat, they often act in irrational and counterproductive ways to grasp for some sense of security.  This includes self-sabotaging behavior.  Although peace is an essential part of security, a lack of vigilance against potential threats due to peace creates a sense of insecurity. 
 
While these defense mechanisms may sound legitimate inside Israel, Israel’s right to protect itself does not matter to Palestinians while the rest of the world is not so willing to accept Israel’s rationales.  Gone are the days when Israel could respond to an escalating conflict with Hamas by unleashing a deadly barrage of missile attacks on the Gaza Strip, especially considering the potential security risk that globalized terrorism now plays in Israel’s conflict with Hamas.  Consequently, Israel needs to make an even greater effort to avoid causalities and collateral damage when defending itself while it must stop provoking the Palestinian People by expanding settlements.   
 
Unless Israel’s policies toward the Palestinian People change, the US faces a future where it will have to choose between supporting the Israeli government and shunning the Peoples of Europe and the Middle East.  Given the broader instability of the region and security threats, the Israel-Palestinian conflict is now a tertiary issue that will largely determine the fate of Israel, not the Middle East.  For Israel, the threat of a globalizing, democratizing Muslim world and globalized terrorism put the Jewish State in a position where their failure to resolve their issues with the Palestinians may well eventually result in a Middle East united against an Israel lacking allies. 
 
For US foreign policy, American support for Israel is increasingly cost prohibitive due to the hardliner approach of leaders like Netanyahu.  Sadly, politics prevents the US from “wavering in its support of Israel,” i.e. openly disagreeing with what Israel does, while being “tough on Hamas” defines the Israeli leadership.  Supporting Netanyahu’s policies, therefore, undermines US influence in the Middle East at a time when it is essential.  Despite America’s unique relationship with Israel, Netanyahu is truly forcing America to choose between the whole of the Middle East and Israel.  It is an unnecessary choice that can only end in one logical conclusion.