Staff Reports
Once again, tragedy has struck as the body of Hersh Goldberg-Polin, an American-Israeli held hostage by the notorious group Hamas, was confirmed on August 31. Alongside five other Israeli hostages, his remains were discovered after 10 long days of anguished pleas from his parents, who had implored for their son’s safe return at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Hersh’s story has gripped many hearts, but the real question on everyone’s mind is whether the current leadership truly supports Israel or is willing to go soft on terrorism.
In her latest public statement, Vice President Kamala Harris managed to condemn Hamas in a way that sounded almost convincing. She labeled them an “evil terrorist organization”—a conclusion that, one could argue, should be on the invocation list of any leadership team with even a hint of competence. Harris seemed adamant about the administration’s commitment to free all hostages, declaring that ensuring the safety of American citizens was her top priority. But with Harris and President Biden wielding the reins, skepticism persists among American-Israelis who have witnessed their lukewarm approach to Israel’s defense.
Despite some Jewish Americans appreciating Harris’s words, a significant number worry that, as President, she would lean towards appeasement rather than steadfast support for one of America’s closest allies. The dark cloud cast by the Hamas massacre on October 7, 2023, which claimed the lives of many, including over thirty Americans, has left a nagging anxiety about whether the promises made now will hold true in the long run. After all, when it comes to ensuring Israel’s security, it’s better to trust a lion than a lamb.
The Biden-Harris administration has had its moments of diplomatic glory, like deploying fighter squadrons and voicing support at the UN. However, the recent decision to withhold 3,500 air-to-ground munitions to Israel suggests a concerning willingness to appease old foes rather than support an ally fighting for its existence. Such moves raise alarms among American citizens in Israel, who wonder just how much they can expect from an administration that may put party loyalties over international duty.
President Donald Trump slams the Biden-Harris administration’s wavering support for Israel and reaffirms his commitment to the Jewish people:
“You have a big protector in me, you don’t have a protector on the other side.” pic.twitter.com/EMGObiUYtH
— Faith & Freedom (@FaithandFreedom) September 20, 2024
Shifting perspectives are evident, especially with the looming presidential election. Former President Donald Trump, who has taken tangible actions to fortify U.S.-Israel relations, stands out in stark contrast to the current administration. His accomplishments, such as relocating the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and decisively supporting Israel during times of crisis, have made him the candidate of choice for many who prioritize Israel’s security. It seems the choice for supporters of Israel boils down to a simple dilemma: a bold, uncertain leader with a proven track record in Trump’s corner, or a calculated, predictable yet potentially harmful choice in Harris.
While some voices like Ethan Kushner argue in defense of Harris’s voting history on arms for Israel, many fear a trend toward appeasement that could endanger lives. Perspectives from American-Israelis show a clear divide; some feel compelled to vote based on personal financial considerations, like taxes or Social Security, while others see their homeland’s security as paramount. The reluctance to trust promises from the Democratic side contrasts sharply with the vibrant legacy left during the Trump administration, evidenced by agreements like the Abraham Accords that fostered peace in the region.
With the election on the horizon, the anxiety surrounding U.S. support for Israel remains palpable. As voters across the globe weigh their options, they must consider what matters most: a secure Israel that stands unwavering against terror or a potential shift towards negotiations that could place its very existence at risk. The clock is ticking, and within the corners of electoral decision-making, only time will reveal if American leadership will take a stand worthy of their allies—or if they will continue down a path of hesitation and capitulation.
