On March 25, during a United Nations Security Council discussion, the United States did something highly unusual. He abstained from a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The United States has vetoed similar resolutions in the past, saying they could impede Israel’s right to “self-defense” and that any resolutions that do not explicitly link a ceasefire to the release of all Israeli hostages from Palestinian custody He also insisted that he would not allow the bill to pass.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately declared the US abstention a deplorable “withdrawal” from the generous support Israel has received since the start of the current iteration of the years-long conflict between the Palestinians and Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu was scheduled to discuss Israel’s planned invasion of Israel in an expression of displeasure, indeed surprise, that the United States should somehow signal a change in its position of unrestricted support for Israel. The Israeli delegation’s visit to the United States was canceled. Rafa.
Many commentators have criticized not only the U.S. abstention vote, but also recent moves such as the criticism of Netanyahu by U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and the call for an Israeli election, which Netanyahu angrily rejected with a sharply worded rebuttal. points out. We are not a banana republic” – an important milestone in what has been characterized as an evolution in relations between Israel and the United States. For example, a diplomat for the Guardian described the US decision to abstain as marking “another moment of painful, almost anguished US diplomacy that distances itself from its key allies in the Middle East”.
It seems that many things have changed
The situation appears to have changed rapidly and significantly over the past few weeks. The United States, which has vetoed UN Security Council resolutions three times, was undoubtedly aware that it was repeatedly being relegated to membership in a tiny minority along with Israel. Tensions are rising between Israel and the United States over the pace and scope of humanitarian aid, especially in the face of looming mass starvation among the Palestinians. Most recently, American pressure on Israel has gradually increased after seven World Central Kitchen aid workers were killed in a reportedly targeted attack by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
Can we then conclude that any significant changes have occurred in the special relationship with the United States that Israel has enjoyed since its founding? Despite these lines reportedly being written Following what was described as a tense phone call between Biden and Netanyahu, Israel finally bowed to US pressure to open new aid routes to Gaza. There is good reason to believe that American dissatisfaction with Israeli intransigence is growing, and some suspect that Israel no longer enjoys unconditional support in the United Nations and, more broadly, in the court of world opinion. . Furthermore, the hard truth is that in electoral democracies, political parties are subject to the capricious effects of changing voters’ sentiments. The more “progressive” wing of the Democratic Party has argued that arms sales to Israel should be coupled with an immediate cessation of hostilities and higher standards of accountability on the Israeli side. University campuses are reeling from anxiety over the Biden administration’s policies. More importantly, both recent polls and the upcoming Democratic primary for November’s presidential election show that Biden is in serious danger of losing support among the Arab American electorate. This suggests that
Still, not much has changed

However, I would argue that analyzes predicting a major shift in U.S. support for Israel are not only premature, they fail to capture the pulse that animates the U.S.-Israel relationship. Before this war, Israel received a huge amount of money from the United States, more than $150 billion, or about $3.8 billion annually. You also have access to America’s advanced warfare technology and weapons systems. The reason why pro-Palestinian protesters appear to be making such a fuss on college campuses is because forces lobbying for both Jewish and Israeli interests have dominated the American university system for far too long. This is because we rarely hear about support for Palestine. Accusations of anti-Semitism remain the most powerful weapon that can be deployed on Israel’s behalf. What is indisputable is that Israel is supported by Democrats and Republicans alike not only as America’s only true friend in the Middle East, but also as the region’s only democracy. .
Whether Israel is actually a “democracy” is not important to this discussion. The fact that a portion of the population enjoys the freedoms normally associated with a democratic state masks another reality: that Israel has been an occupying power for decades, and that the Palestinians are in a state of clear and dire subjugation. You can’t hide it.
Why U.S.-Israel relations are unlikely to worsen
There is one more important consideration. I have argued elsewhere that there are certain synergies between Israel and the United States as settler-colonial states (“In this together”, IE, December 21, 2023). A messianic spirit has long influenced Americans’ self-perception and guided American foreign policy. Inherent in American exceptionalism is the belief that America is “the only nation indispensable,” as every American president since World War II has proclaimed at one time or another. . Although Israel does not have the courage to say the same thing explicitly about itself, the State of Israel acts with the utmost confidence in performing a moral purchase on the rest of humanity. Of course, it is the murder of six million Jews that gives the Jewish state of Israel a special place in history, and the unfettered and unquestioned right to oppress others in the name of “self-defense.” It is based on the premise that . Given this synergy, it is highly doubtful whether there has been or is likely to change anything substantive in US-Israel relations in the near future.
The author is a professor of history at the University of California, Los Angeles
