Though the United States remains a strong supporter of Israel, there are some indications that the supposed ‘unbreakable bond’ with Tel Aviv is faltering, though more in language than in deeds.
Following the provocative ‘Marca março’ on May 18, which is carried out annually by Israeli Jewish extremists in the Occupied Palestinian city of East Jerusalem, the US joined other countries around the world in condemning the racism displayed at the event.
The language used by the US State Department was firm, but also guarded. Spokesman Matthew Miller did not condemn the racist, provocative march – which involved leading Israeli officials – but the language used by the large crowds, most of whom are strong supporters of the far-right government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“Os Estados Unidos se opõem inequivocamente à linguagem racista de qualquer forma”, Miller twittou. “Condenamos os gritos de ódio como ‘Morte aos Árabes’ durante as marchas de hoje em Jerusalém.”
Carefully articulated not to appear as a condemnation of Israel itself, the US position is still more ‘balanced’ than previous positions, where Palestinians were often the ones associated with the US use of words such as “condemnation”, “incitement”, and the like.
Por outro lado, durante os sangrentos cinco dias israelitas guerra on Gaza, starting on May 9, Washington had resorted to the same old script, that of Israel having the ‘right to defend itself’, thus entirely misrepresenting the events which led to the war in the first place.
This US position on Israel’s war on Gaza suggests that Netanyahu is the ‘defender’ of Israel against supposed Palestinian violence and ‘terrorism’. But this purported champion of Israeli rights is yet to be convidado to the White House five months after he returned to power at the helm of Israel’s most rightwing government in history.
Some want to believe that the decision by the Joe Biden administration to distance itself from Netanyahu was entirely altruistic. But that cannot be the case, as the US continues to back Israel militarily, financially, politically and in every other way.
A resposta reside nos grandes erros de cálculo cometidos por Netanyahu no passado, quando ultrapassou uma linha perigosa, ao virar-se contra o Partido Democrata e aliando seu país inteiramente com os republicanos. As suas tácticas renderam dividendos durante o mandato do presidente republicano Donald Trump, mas o tiro saiu pela culatra quando Trump deixou a Casa Branca.
Biden é inquestionavelmente pró-Israel. Segundo as suas repetidas observações, o seu apoio a Israel não é apenas político, mas também ideológico. “Eu sou um sionista. Você não precisa ser judeu para ser sionista”, ele disse repetido, e com orgulho, em diversas ocasiões.
But the US President is also anti-Netanyahu, uma antipatia que precedeu até o caso amoroso Trump-Netanyahu. Principalmente datas back to Barack Obama’s two terms in office, when Biden was the vice president.
Netanyahu’s political shenanigans and relentless attacks on the Obama Administration at the time taught Biden that Netanyahu simply cannot be trusted.
No entanto, Biden, com classificações historicamente baixas entre os americanos comuns, não pode, por si só, desafiar Netanyahu e a fortaleza de Israel em Washington através do seu lobby influente.
Outra coisa está em jogo, nomeadamente o facto de o Partido Democrata como um todo ter mudado de alianças, de Israel para a Palestina.
Esta afirmação teria sido impensável no passado, mas a mudança é real, confirmada repetidamente por empresas de sondagens credíveis. O mais recente foi em março.
“After a decade in which Democrats have shown increasing affinity toward the Palestinians, their sympathies … now lie more with the Palestinians than the Israelis, 49% versus 38%,” the Gallup poll Concluído.
The fact that such growing ‘affinity’ with Palestine has been taking place for at least a decade suggests that the position of the Democrats was a generational one, not an outcome of a single event.
Indeed, numerous organizations and countless individuals are working on a daily basis to create a link between ‘affinity’ and policy.
Buoyed by the growing sympathies for Palestine, long-time advocate of Palestinians’ rights in the US Congress, Rep. Betty McCollum reintroduzido, on May 5, the ‘Defending the Human Rights of Palestinian Children and Families Living Under Israeli Military Occupation Act’.
Co-sponsored by 16 other members of Congress, the legislation demands that Israel must be prohibited from using “US taxpayer dollars in the Occupied West Bank for the military detention, abuse or ill-treatment of Palestinian children.”
Two years earlier, the Intercept had relatado that McCollum and her supporters were pushing towards barring US aid to Israel from “subsidizing a wider array of Israeli occupation tactics.”
alex kane escreveu, this is “an indication of just how far the debate over the US aid to Israel has come in the past six years”, a reference to 2015, when McCollum introduced the first legislation on the matter.
Desde então, as coisas avançaram em velocidade ainda mais acelerada. O esforço para responsabilizar Israel chegou agora à assembleia do estado de Nova Iorque.
On May 16, The New York Post relatado that legislation was introduced by several Democratic lawmakers aimed at blocking registered US charities from funneling money to fund illegal Israeli Jewish settlements.
A legislação, “Not on Our Dime!: Ending New York Funding of Israeli Settler Violence Act” dares to challenge Israel on multiple fronts: the traditional power of the pro-Israel lobby, questioning US funding of Israel and confronting the channeling of funds to illegal settlements in the name of charity work.
Several reasons compel us to believe that the shift in US policy on Palestine and Israel, though slow, nuanced and, at times, symbolic, will likely continue.
One is the fact that Israel is turning towards far-right nationalism, which is increasingly difficult to defend by US liberal government and media.
Em segundo lugar, a firmeza dos palestinianos e a sua capacidade para superar as restrições e a censura dos principais meios de comunicação social que os impediam de ter qualquer representação justa.
And, finally, the dedication of numerous civil society organizations and the widening network of support for Palestinians throughout the US, which allowed courageous lawmakers to push for substantive change in policy.
O tempo dirá que direcção Washington tomará no futuro. Mas, tendo em conta as evidências actuais, o apoio a Israel está a diminuir a taxas sem precedentes.
Para aqueles que defendem uma paz justa na Palestina, isto é uma coisa boa.
ZNetwork é financiado exclusivamente pela generosidade de seus leitores.
OFERTAR