America’s Unconditional Support for Israel: A Flawed Policy

“He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.”

Such were the words of the controversial, and at times provocative, German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who warned that in fighting evil one risks becoming the very evil he is fighting. This is something the United States of America stands accused of for its unconditional support for the State of Israel, including the latter’s past human rights abuses and the casualties in the Gaza Strip caused by the latter that have reached a genocidal level. As evident, the modern State of Israel’s political prowess, based on the illusion “that the return of Jews to their ancestral homeland is part of a messianic fulfilment,” has gone beyond the observance of the rule of law as established by the international community. 

This summer, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel was in breach of international law with its occupation of the Palestinian Territories in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. The ICJ ordered the Israelis to both bring this to an end and make reparations for damage they created. In like manner, the U.N. General Assembly, in September, overwhelmingly voted—124 nations in favor, 14 against, and 43 abstentions—that Israel should withdraw from its illegal occupation. The U.S., as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, vetoed the measure, thus rendering it null.

Indeed, even fellow Israelis have called out Israel’s crimes. For example, according to B’tselem, an Israeli human rights organization, under Itamar Ben-Gvir, the incumbent Israeli Minister of National Security, Palestinian detainees have been subjected to “systematic, institutional policy of unrelenting physical and psychological violence,” which is on par with the escalation in Christian persecution in the Holy Land. Also, this past May,  a self-proclaimed soldier from Israel’s infamous Netzah Yehuda battalion gloated of his unit’s killing of a 78-year-old Palestinian-American and likewise flaunted his genocidal views. After announcing plans to sanction the battalion, the Biden administration inexplicably pulled back. 

And just this past month, multiple videos showed  personnel of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) kicking and pushing four Palestinian bodies off a roof of a building during a military raid in the occupied West Bank town of Qabatiya. With all likelihood, just as with Shireen Abu Akleh, a Catholic Palestinian journalist who was shot dead by an Israeli sniper while covering a military operation in the West Bank, there will be no accountability.

One then inquires why U.S. presidents and lawmakers are reticent to criticize Israel when its own citizens have been saliently critical of its present policies, like the hundreds of thousands who protested last year against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s judicial reform. Or, his inability to both end the war in Gaza and liberate the hostages that are still being held captive by Hamas.  One then inquires why U.S. presidents and lawmakers are reticent to criticize Israel when its own citizens have been saliently critical of its present policies.Tweet This

A rationale for Washington’s unequivocal support is that it argues Israel has a “shared-democracy” surrounded by hostile dictatorships, which must be safeguarded at all costs—interesting, since the U.S. has both overthrown democratic governments and supported dictators in the past. In other words, Washington parallels Israel’s governmental structure to American liberal democracy, where people of any race, religion, or ethnicity are supposed to enjoy equal rights. This is spurious because the State of Israel was explicitly established as a Jewish state and citizenship is based on the principle of blood kinship. As a result, Israel denies Palestinians who marry Israeli citizens from becoming citizens themselves, and consequently, it does not grant such spouses the right to live in Israel. 

The aforementioned B’tselem called this restriction “a racist law that determines who can live here according to racist criteria.” Such laws may be understandable given Israel’s founding principles, but they are inconsistent with America’s image of democracy. 

Like any other nation, Israel has the right to defend itself against threats from its enemies, including the terrorist organization of Hamas. But as France’s President Emmanuel Macron has said: ‘The fight against terrorism does not justify the sacrifice of civilians.”

This is not to say that the U.S. should break off ties with the Israelis, quite the contrary. Yet there hardly seems to be any compelling moral rationale for what has become an uncritical and uncompromising rapport with Israelis, more so under the present Netanyahu government. This exclusivity has been detrimental, as it has only fostered contempt in the Arab world, nay, in America, thereby complicating the chaotic situation in the Middle East even more, as is seen with the latest confrontations between Israel and Hezbollah.

On November 5, Americans will elect the 47th President of our United States. The lines that have long defined the Democratic and Republican parties’ policies have been a bit of a conundrum, as former President Donald Trump has vowed to cap credit card interest rates and force insurance companies to cover in vitro fertilization, and Vice President Harris has talked up gun ownership and promised tough border security measures.

Regardless of who wins, one thing is for certain: the U.S., at the risk of becoming complicit in Israel’s violation of international law and human rights abuses, will most definitely continue its unconditional support for the Jewish state. And history will judge us for that, though it does not have to be that way if we only hold the foreign policy elitists accountable.

[Image Credit: Shutterstock]