By Jason Sibert

The Israel-Iran war dominates America’s foreign policy at this time. Of course, many think that hardline Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu used his influence to push Trump into the war, and I think they’re right. I recently saw former Senator, Presidential Candidate, and Secretary of State John Kerry say on a news program that Netanyahu had attempted to push the US to join Israel in a war against Iran in the George W Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden Administrations. The war against Iran, just like the war against Hamas, has triggered a lot of discussion about Zionism, antisemitism, the history of Israel, and all kinds of other things related to Israel. Current events forced me to write a story on Zionism. It’s a different sort of story – the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Of course, anyone who knows their history knows this: Zionism as a movement started in the late 1800s with Theodore Herzl. It existed due to the antisemitism in various parts of the world. The movement picked up steam after the Holocaust of the 30s and 40s. Since its founding in the 1940s, Israel has achieved many accomplishments. For the most part, many Jews have lived in peace since its founding, and financially, Israel has become a very wealthy nation and has experienced many years as a vibrant democracy. In addition, and I must say this as a social democrat, Israel’s economy has many social democratic features, although it no longer represents the democratic socialism defined by its earlier years, when it drew much of its politics from Labor Zionism.

I recently saw a derogatory bumper sticker posted on a wall opposing Zionism here in St. Louis. I don’t remember what it said, but I do remember thinking whoever posted the bumper sticker knew nothing about Zionism. I would love to have asked him or her, “What type of Zionism are you so against?” I highly doubt that the person in question could have answered the question, at least not intelligently. After all, there is Labor Zionism (Democratic Socialism), General Zionism (Centrism), Liberal Zionism (Emphasis on Democracy), Revisionist Zionism (Territorial Expansionism), Religious Zionism (Religious Conservatism and Nationalism), Cultural Zionism (Creating a Jewish Cultural Center in Palestine but no state), Revolutionary Zionism (a revolutionary struggle to bring Jews from the diaspora, revive the Hebrew language, and reestablish Israel) Reform Zionism (which seeks to make Zionism fundamental to the life of Reform Jews), Secular Zionism (a homeland based on Jewish culture and history and not religion), Christian Zionism (Christians who see the return of the Jews to Israel as a part of Biblical prophecy), Post-Zionism (building an Israel that in multi-ethnic and democratic), Green Zionism (environmentalism and Zionism), Federal Zionism (the idea of a nation-state with sovereign divisions), and Islamic Zionism (Muslim supporters of Israel).

From the left side of the political spectrum, I’ve heard much about Zionism being racist or settler colonialism. This is nothing new. Remember when former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan rejected “Zionism as racism” in the 70’s when this idea was being spread on the left? With so many forms of Zionism, it’s hard to argue that the movement can be defined by racism or settler colonialism, even though some in the movement support ideas that are unsavory. I have my beef with Religious Zionism because of its theocratic tendencies and with Revisionist Zionism’s thirst for a greater Israel. On a news program, I heard former Ambassador Rahm Emmanuel, a Jew whom I support for President in 2028, say the territorial expansionism of this political tendency in Israel will fail due to political opposition around the world. In addition, I have a beef with Christian Zionism because it’s guided by a centuries-old text in a world where nation-states possess horrific weapons of destruction.

The Left was also critical of Israel’s conduct in the war against Hamas. Many have leveled the charge of genocide. Israel has repeatedly issued evacuation warnings and designated areas for Palestinians to flee during its military operations against Hamas. This means what’s occurring, which is horrific, does not count as genocide. I realize the effectiveness and safety of these opportunities are widely disputed. The opportunities Israel offered were disputed because many humanitarian organizations, journalists, and people inside Gaza said those “escape routes” or “safe zones” were not actually safe, accessible, or adequate for survival for many. There was limited food, inadequate water, insufficient shelter, and medical care. Also, many of the Palestinians who have been hurt in the war have nothing to do with Hamas. This means Israel is guilty of collective punishment under international law and not genocide.

Let’s move to the right side of the political spectrum, where figures like Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Nick Fuentes have criticized Israel because they think our foreign policy puts Israel’s interests before the US’s. Fuentes is an antisemite, and Carlson might not be one, but he deserves no credit for programming Fuentes. Kelly and Taylor Greene might not be anti-Semitic, but, like many on the right, they accuse Trump of putting Israel first and not America first. Although I don’t sympathize with the views of any of the above-mentioned right-leaning figures on much of anything, I do think the US should act in its own interest in the Middle East and not always in Israel’s self-interest.

Why doesn’t the US look out for its own interests? In my earlier story for Social Democrats USA’s blog, titled “Lessons From the US-Israel Relationship,” I quoted Michael Lind’s story “Distorting U.S. Foreign Policy: The Israel Lobby and American Power” for ammunition. Mr. Lind talked about how Israel’s occupation of the West Bank inflamed Arab and Muslim opinion around the world against the US and how the expansion of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land makes a mockery of the US commitment to self-determination for Kosovo, East Timor, and Tibet. He also talked about the power of the Israel lobby, AIPAC, and pointed out that not all Jewish Americans are in line with political currents in Israel. The Israel lobby wants two things– a huge amount of funding for Israel and diplomatic cover for the state in the United Nations and other forums, and it usually gets them. Lind also addressed the Israel lobby’s far-reaching power in denying Bobby Ray Inman the post of Secretary of Defense. Inman was savaged in the press by William Safire, a former Nixon speechwriter and conservative Republican. In his New York Times column, Safire damned Inman for having “contributed to the excessive sentencing of Jonathan Pollard,” Israel’s spy in the naval intelligence service. Pollard (a traitor to his country) was a US Naval intelligence employee who was caught spying for Israel.

In Lind’s book, George W Bush and the Southern Takeover of American Politics, he discussed the times when Israel’s national interest and our own have been at odds and how Presidents like Eisenhower, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clinton and George HW Bush realized this and acted accordingly, or, in the case of Carter and Clinton, acted as a broker between Israel and its Arab neighbors or the Palestinians. I do consider Israel a trusted ally, and the above-mentioned Presidents defended the state and our own interests at the same time. Lind accused Israel of violating international law in continuing to occupy the West Bank. The US has not recognized territory gained by force since 1945. On the other hand, the US is in no position to lecture on international law because it violated international law with the invasion of Iraq, Libya, and Iran (along with Israel). For further reading on the Israel-US relationship, check out Lind’s story: Israel is not America’s Greatest Ally.

In addition to the treatment of the Palestinians in the West Bank, I’m also concerned about the poor treatment of the Christian community in Jerusalem. Why do I still defend Israel despite all my concerns? Because the state is a necessity for the security of the Jewish community; it emerged not only out of the Holocaust but out of centuries of antisemitism, and remember what a hateful ideology Hamas, the government of Iran, and Hezbollah represent. Israel also represents a valuable way for our country to project power in the Middle East, although it’s done so in a silly way in the past. In addition, the state isn’t in the orbit of authoritarian China or Russia.

Is there an answer to the Palestinian/Israel question? I believe there is – a Palestinian confederation. I wrote about this in my story for Progressive Populist titled “The Case for an Israeli-Palestinian Confederation.” In this story, I recommend a Palestinian political confederation within the borders of Israel but not a Palestinian state. I hope my faith in Israel will continue in the future, but for that to happen, the opposition to Netanyahu must win!

Jason Sibert is the Lead Writer of the Peace Economy Project.