Bibi and Biden
Politics is trumping principal in the actions of both leaders
To say that Israel’s present government is not the ideal set of leaders one would choose to lead the country through its most dangerous war since the War of Independence, would be an understatement. War time leadership calls for qualities of leadership and the willingness to do unpopular things. At times of national emergency, Israeli leaders have sometimes performed acts of “mamlachtiut”, a word that is hard to translate, but means something like “statesmanship”. In particular it refers to an act that sacrifices the interests of one’s faction for the greater good of the State of Israel.
One example that is often cited is the decision by Menachem Begin not to retaliate when the Haganah sank the Alta Lena, a ship that was bringing arms for the Irgun Tzvai Le'umi in June of 1948. The Irgun was the armed faction that Begin led during the period of the British mandate, prior to Israel’s independence. The Irgun refused to turn over the arms arriving on the Alta Lena to the newly formed Israel Defense Forces(IDF), of which the Irgun was nominally a part, and instead persisted in trying to unload the arms for its own use, independent of the army. Rather than allow this to happen the Haganah/IDF fired on the Alta Lena and sunk the ship, losing the desperately needed arms. The altercation led to the death of several fighters, from both the Irgun and the IDF. Begin’s decision not to retaliate, averted a potential civil war.
A more recent example was the decision by Naftali Bennett in June of 2021, to forge a coalition with the center left, after a fourth election in less than two years left Israel without a government. This led to the demise of Bennett’s party and the end of his own political career, at least for now, but it allowed the formation of a government and saved Israel from going to a fifth possibly inconclusive election.
Image: PM Benjamin Netanyahu and President Joe Biden — Image from Times of Israel
Benjamin Netanyahu is a gifted man who has led Israel’s governments for much of the past 30 years. His energy, intelligence and determination are highly unusual, and he inspires a fanatical loyalty in a segment of the Israeli population that sees him as a bulwark against leftists who would sell out the nation for the sake of international approval.
That said, the policies of the government he formed at the beginning of last year had led Israel to the brink of social disruption. To those of us who are supportive of Israel but not supportive of many of those policies it looked like Netanyahu was willing to agree to just about anything to get another term in office. His political maneuvering over the past few years, forming governments with parties of both right and center, agreeing, in return for support, to policy measures that he had previousl opposed, and frequently breaking the promises he made to coalition partners, seems to me be the opposite of “mamlachtiut”.
In the aftermath of the security failure of October 7, he has mostly failed to acknowledge responsibility for what happened, and instead variously blamed the army, protesters, the families of the hostages, and anyone else criticizing his actions for the difficulties facing his wartime government.
Since the outbreak of the war, his core support has fallen precipitously because he has failed in the area that has been his brand, the promise to keep Israelis secure. Meanwhile, one of the promises he made to his coalition partners when the government was formed is threatening this week to bring down the government.
This was a promise to codify into law an exemption from military service for young ultra orthodox men, as long as they are studying at recognized Haredi yeshivas. The Yeshivas are the ones which obtain the exemption, which ties the young men to the Yeshiva which submits their name. In the past year 66,000 such exemptions were granted. This measure is very unpopular, coming in the middle of a war and after the government extended mandatory military service, and lengthened reserve service due to a shortage of personnel. It is not clear whether the government has the votes, as members of the coalition waver. The party of Benny Gantz, which joined a unity government three weeks after the beginning of the war has said it will leave the government if the measure is passed.
In this context the current public fight with the Biden Administration is good for Bibi’s reputation as a defender of Israel’s interests, and he may hope that it will increase support for his government. The Biden administration seems to be increasingly deaf to Israel’s concerns and more and more under the influence of an anti-Israel minority in the US Democratic Party. At the same time it risks harm to the Israeli-American alliance on which Israel depends for much of its military edge. This ought to be a reason for Israel’s government to proceed cautiously, but that doesn’t seem to be what Bibi is doing today.
Joe Biden is a man whose record of public service to America is indisputable. He beat a sitting President in 2020, a rare feat in American politics. He has served in the United States Senate for decades. His record of support for Israel over that very long period of time is consistent.
A core initiative in the Middle East during his presidency, has been an attempt to extend the Abraham accords to include Saudi Arabia, which would be an achievement of great value to Israel. In order to advance this goal, he looked to Israel’s government to leave room for the possibility of a Palestinian state, at least in principle. The attempt to build a strategic partnership with the Saudis represented a big shift in Biden’s position when he ran for President, when he called for the isolation of the Saudi regime. It was good politics as well as good policy for Biden, who wanted to keep both Jewish and Arab voters happy.
In the aftermath of the October 7 atrocities, I was pleasantly surprised by the clarity and unequivocal language used in Joe Biden’s declarations of support for Israel. Not only did he seem to empathize with Israelis, he supported Israel’s war aims and agreed that Hamas must be eliminated as the ruling authority in Gaza. The US consistently blocked adverse measures advanced at the UN Security Council by countries hostile to Israel.
In addition, the US sent large amounts of military aid to Israel in the weeks after the outbreak of hostilities. The Administration requested that Congress appropriate additional money for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, but that measure has become bogged down in election year politics and has not been passed in spite of strong support for the measure in the US House of Representatives.
At the same time, from the beginning of the war, the Biden Administration articulated its own agenda which differs from that of the Israeli government. In particular, their vision of the future of Gaza includes what they called “a revitalized Palestinian Authority”. They made it clear that they thought it would be a mistake for Israel to “reoccupy” Gaza.
Israel’s activity in Gaza over the months seemed, in part to reflect the concerns of the Biden administration. For example, they made no move to set up any sort of occupying government in any of the territory that the IDF entered and withdrew from swathes of northern Gaza once military operations were concluded. They have also greatly reduced the number of personnel in Gaza since the beginning of the war and reduced the intensity of fighting since the beginning of 2024.
The lack of alternative governance in Gaza became a problem, as Hamas police and other elements took charge of these areas when Israel withdrew. Israel would then go back into these areas and attack the Hamas police forces. The result has been a power vacuum and an anarchic situation in parts of Gaza where Israel has entered and subsequently withdrawn. Particularly in the north, this seems to have led to shortages of food for civilians who remain there. Efforts to get food into Northern Gaza have had some success, but it seems that Hamas has no interest in allowing this to happen. Several bloody incidents have occurred and been blamed on Israel. It seems probable that provocations planned by Hamas were the cause of these incidents. Meanwhile international organizations scream about increasing hunger in Gaza.
Netanyahu has been vocal in his criticism of Biden’s talk of a return to Gaza by the Palestinian Authority. The PA itself has been largely supportive of Hamas and its anti-Israel rhetoric has been strident and defamatory. The PA attended another empty reconciliation meeting with representatives of Hamas organized by the Russians in Moscow.
The one positive step taken by the PA was the appointment of a new Prime Minister. This was denounced by Hamas and in response, a spokesman for the PA’s ruling Fatah organization blamed Hamas for the disaster in Gaza. This is the only time I’ve heard anyone anyone on the Palestinian side put the blame for the war where it belongs.
While Biden has maintained his support in principal for Israel’s war aims, the positions taken by Kamala Harris have been increasingly harsh. In recent weeks, Biden himself has been outspoken in his opposition to an Israeli operation in Rafah. These comments seemed to leave Israel with less and less room to maneuver, making continuing verbal support for the war aims seem increasingly hollow.
Just as Benjamin Netanyahu may have hoped that his public arguments with the Biden Administration would help him politically, the Administration finds itself in a position where it is paying a political price for the support it has been offering to Israel. It seems that the impending prospect of a close electoral rematch with Donald Trump is moving the Biden administration away from support of Israel and toward political expediency.
The events of the past couple of days seem to have brought the matter to a head. On Saturday, the Israelis made significant concessions, accepting an American compromise proposal, in Qatar. Hamas offered nothing in return, insisting that Israel should withdraw completely from Gaza.
Yesterday, the UN Security Counsel considered a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire and the American representative abstained, allowing it to pass. In response, Bibi cancelled discussions with the administration, planned for this week in Washington. These meetings were supposed to be about the administration’s ideas for completing the defeat Hamas without an incursion into Rafah.
The White House complained this morning that Israel was overreacting. They claimed their position vis-a-vis Israel has not changed. They accused Israel of blaming them unfairly for Hamas intransigence at the ceasefire talks.
In the Times Of Israel Daily Briefing this morning, editor David Horovitz expressed his dismay at the American actions. The lead editorial in this week’s Economist warns that if America stops supporting Israel at the UN, Israel’s security could be endangered. At the UN, Francesca Albanese, one of many anti-Israel “special rapporteur’s”, claimed that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
The Israeli-American relationship seems to be at a low point today. What Israel will do next is unclear. The anger being expressed in international institutions and in the media continues unabated, and it seems possible that a famine will be officially declared in northern Gaza in the near future. With no prospect of releasing hostages by agreeing to a ceasefire, Israel has no choice but to fight on. What the Americans will do next is also unclear.
While the public spat may be of short term political benefit to both Bibi and Biden, the damage to Israel’s security, and to America’s reputation as a reliable ally, will live on after the current political battles are over. I pray that the two leaders will find a way to continue to collaborate and that the public feuding will not prevent cooperation on a pragmatic plan to achieve the goals that both sides say they want.
Those goals are the release of all hostages and the removal of Hamas from power in Gaza. Is it too much to hope that Bibi will turn his mind to the long term interests of Israel, even if it costs him politically? Is he capable of an act of “mamlachtiut”? Is it too much to hope that Biden will give some thought to the impact further weakening the trust of America’s allies will have on a world which is already increasingly in chaos?
Thank you to the new subscribers who have joined us since our last publication on Sunday. If you are a paid subscriber you can leave a comment.
If you are not yet a paid subscriber, please consider upgrading today. I’d be very grateful for your support.
To everyone, thank you for reading Canadian Zionist Forum.
The hostages must be released, aid needs to get to the Palestinians, and Hamas has to be defeated. And having Israel and the U.S. at this level of discord is frightening and won't accomplish any of those mandates. As you have pointed out, Netanyahu is not acting with "mamlachtiut" . But is the only solution going to be waiting for a change of leadership in either or both countries?
An excellent analysis and a very sad state of affairs. Netanyahu is giving comfort to Hamas and the antisemites of this world...