The United States likes to present itself as honest brokers (honest broker) between Palestinians and Israelis – or between Arabs and Israelis. It is true that the Camp David accords between Egypt and Israel in 1977, those in Oslo between Palestinians and Israelis in 1993 or more recently the Abraham Accords in 2020 were concluded with their sponsorship.
The United States has repeatedly attempted to establish negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. But they are not quite equidistant from the positions of each of the camps. They have always had a pro-Israel tropism displayed and often claimed. During the Cold War, Israel was the ally of the Western world when most Arab regimes were more linked to the Soviet Union – like Egypt until 1975, Syria, Libya or Iraq. After the end of the Cold War, Israel lost some of its strategic relevance as a result. When President Bush wanted to embark on the Gulf War in 1990 after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, he wanted to build a broad international coalition. He promised Arab countries, to gain their support, to seriously tackle the Palestinian issue once Saddam Hussein’s problem is resolved. He actually lobbied Israel, threatening to stop guaranteeing loans to the Hebrew state if settlement continued. Israeli voters feared a break with Washington and brought Yitzhak Rabin to power. Negotiations between protagonists who refused to speak to each other resulted in the Oslo accords. But Bush lost the election in 1992. He was the last American president who really put pressure on Israel. Since then, possible disagreements between the White House and Tel Aviv have been able to exist without it provoking any American reaction.
Subsequently, even when they played the middleman, the Americans rather adopted the Israeli theses than the other way around. Several elements link them: the common belonging to the Western world, the weight of evangelical Christians in the United States and a cultural proximity between nations which consider themselves to have a status apart. Guilt over anti-Semitism also played a role.
After September 11, 2001, there was a quick questioning in the United States as to whether the unconditional alliance with Israel was not the source of the United States’ unpopularity in the Arab world. This question was quickly closed in the name of the common fight against terrorism.
The question now is whether this strategic alliance will continue to exist, whatever the attitude of the Israeli government. And after the bombings in Gaza and the clashes in Jerusalem, the question can be asked again. Donald Trump accepted everything from Netanyahu. Joe Biden will be less complacent, but he should not question this alliance. Recent events, however, have opened up a debate on this point in the United States. A month ago, the large organization Human Rights Watch called apartheid the fate of the Palestinians by Israel.
In addition, the American Jewish community is distancing itself from Netanyahu, who was linked to Donald Trump while American Jews vote two-thirds for Democrats. Young elected Democrats, like Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, publicly criticize Israel’s attitude. Joe Biden even publicly praised Rashida Tlaib on May 18, Congress woman of Palestinian origin who had nevertheless criticized American support for Israel. Georgia Senator Jon Ossof, a 34-year-old Jew, has called for a ceasefire. 28 Democratic senators have done the same, while American elected officials generally blame the Palestinians and strongly support Israel. Senator Menendez (New Jersey), usually a staunch supporter of Israel, said he was very disturbed by the bombing. But if these elected officials are very visible and very media, they remain relatively isolated. The destruction of the media building where the agency was located Associated Press created a shock in the United States where everything about the media is sacred. There is an early campaign against Israel on American campuses.
The strategic ties between Washington and Tel Aviv remain strong. But a once-impossible debate is beginning to open up in the United States. For many, the moral arguments that led to proclaiming infallible solidarity with Israel on the Palestinian issue are increasingly irrelevant.
–
