This isn’t pro-Israel: Cutting US aid to Israel rewards its enemies - opinion
Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
TLDR
- The article criticizes J-Street's call for reassessing US aid to Israel, arguing it rewards enemies and is not genuinely pro-Israel.
- It highlights a shift in US Democratic politics, with some senators voting to ban weapons sales to Israel, a move previously considered anti-Israel.
- The author contends that cutting aid, particularly for defense systems like the Iron Dome, emboldens adversaries and undermines Israel's security.
The Jerusalem Post, as a publication deeply committed to Israel's security and its alliance with the United States, views the recent calls to reassess and potentially cut US aid to Israel with grave concern. The article argues forcefully that such actions, particularly those advocated by groups like J-Street, are not only misguided but actively detrimental to Israel's safety and standing.
Since October 7, 2023, approximately 30,000 missiles and rockets have been fired at Israel. Missiles have been fired from Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen by different terrorist organizations, individuals, and nations, including Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and others.
We are witnessing a disturbing trend where positions previously considered outside the mainstream of pro-Israel advocacy are gaining traction within American political discourse. The vote by 40 Democratic senators to ban weapons sales to Israel, including funding for the vital Iron Dome missile defense system, is a stark example. This move, framed by some as a means to prevent Israeli 'aggression,' fundamentally misunderstands the existential threats Israel faces daily. Since October 7, 2023, Israel has endured tens of thousands of missile and rocket attacks from various hostile actors, making robust defense capabilities not a luxury, but a necessity for survival.
By simply staying in place and not fleeing in the face of all these attacks, Israelis have proven their resilience.
The author contends that cutting off or phasing out US military and financial assistance to Israel is a dangerous precedent, akin to former President Gerald Ford's past pressures on Israel. It rewards the very terrorist organizations and hostile nations – including Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis – that relentlessly target the Jewish state. The argument that Israel should 'pay full price' for arms, as suggested by former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, ignores the unique strategic partnership and shared security interests that have long underpinned the US-Israel relationship. This is not simply another ally; it is a crucial partner in a volatile region.
As a response to the overwhelming attacks on Israel, J-Street, an organization that claims to be pro-Israel, released a policy statement calling for the reassessment of the US-Israel security relationship.
From our perspective, the notion that restricting defensive capabilities like the Iron Dome makes Israel 'more aggressive' is a perverse logic. It is precisely Israel's ability to defend its citizens that allows it to deter attacks and maintain a semblance of stability. Weakening these defenses only emboldens those who seek Israel's destruction. The Jerusalem Post believes that a strong, secure Israel is in America's best interest, and undermining that security through aid cuts is a shortsighted policy that ultimately rewards Israel's enemies and jeopardizes regional stability.
This reassessment, reminiscent of former US president Gerald Ford’s threats to Israel, called for the United States to phase out direct financial support for arms sales to Israel.
Originally published by Jerusalem Post. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.