[[link removed]]

THIS IS THE STORY OF HOW THE DEMOCRATS BLEW IT ON GAZA  
[[link removed]]


 

Ben Rhodes
December 1, 2025
The New York Times
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ By letting go of an outdated approach, Democrats can reclaim their
values, foster a bigger and more stable coalition and start building
the world they want, rather than defending the indefensible. _

The Biden administration smothered the Israeli prime minister,
Benjamin Netanyahu, with support, thinking it would give it influence
over his actions.Credit..., Evan Vucci/Associated Press

 

Less than two weeks after the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, President Joe Biden
traveled to Israel and held Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in an
embrace
[[link removed]].
The image captured the solidarity Americans felt with Israelis after
they suffered such horrific violence. It also symbolized a political
and governing reflex within the Democratic Party.

During the Biden presidency, it was shorthanded the “hug Bibi
[[link removed]]”
strategy — the idea that smothering Mr. Netanyahu with unconditional
support would give the U.S. leverage to influence his actions. Over
the final 15 months of the Biden presidency, this approach led the
White House to provide a flood of weapons
[[link removed]]
for Israel’s bombardment of Palestinians, veto
[[link removed]]
United Nations Security Council resolutions calling for a cease-fire,
attack [[link removed]] the
International Criminal Court for pursuing charges against Mr.
Netanyahu, ignore its own policies
[[link removed]]
about supporting military units credibly accused of war crimes
[[link removed]]
and blame Hamas for not accepting cease-fire terms that the Israeli
government
[[link removed]]
was also rejecting.

This approach made Democrats hypocrites when defending a
“rules-based order,” racial equality and democracy. It alienated
[[link removed]] elements of
their base and placed them out of step with younger voters
[[link removed]].
And in an age of authoritarianism, fealty to an Israeli strongman who
routinely humiliated them made Democrats appear weak: Mr. Netanyahu
was hugged all the way into the arms of Donald Trump.

Today, with a tenuous cease-fire, it may be tempting for the party to
memory hole what has happened in Gaza. After all, Democrats just won
some resounding electoral victories focused on affordability, and
there is no easy consensus on the Middle East. Yet this would compound
the mistake of ignoring, or rationalizing, an intolerable reality.

In Gaza, Palestinians live amid mountains of rubble, Hamas remains
entrenched and international journalists are still routinely denied
entry to catalog the destruction. The Israeli Parliament has voted
[[link removed]]
(again) in favor of annexing the West Bank, where brutal attacks
[[link removed]]
by Israeli settlers are escalating
[[link removed]].
Israeli politics has drifted so far to the right that even the removal
of Mr. Netanyahu is unlikely to usher in a moderate government that
swiftly changes course.

Certainly, this is a painful and personal issue for many politicians
and voters genuinely concerned about Israel’s security and Jewish
safety around the world. Yet it is past time for Democrats to stop
supporting this Israeli government. By letting go of an outdated
approach, Democrats can reclaim their values, foster a bigger and more
stable coalition and start building the world they want, rather than
defending the indefensible.

DEMOCRATS HAVE LONG HELD virtuous reasons for supporting Israel. Louis
Brandeis saw Israel’s socialist kibbutzim as a haven for European
Jews and as part of a global effort to advance progressive policies.
Harry Truman’s recognition of Israel was a commitment to security
for the Jewish people after the Holocaust. Jews marched alongside
Black people in pursuit of civil rights and joined them as a core of
the Democratic Party’s base. Through the Cold War, Israel retained
the dual status of an underdog and a democratic ally.

[A displaced Palestinian woman sits with children amid devastated
tents.]
In the final 15 months of the Biden presidency, the White House
authorized a flood of weapons for Israel’s bombardment of
Gaza.Credit...Omar Al-Qattaa/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

While this support often overlooked Palestinian displacement, it has
become harder for politicians today to square the story they tell
about Israel with the reality of a right-wing government determined to
block the emergence of a Palestinian state and to annex the West Bank
[[link removed]].

Consider the language that many Democrats routinely use. Israel is
“the only democracy in the Middle East” and “has a right to
defend itself.” The Palestinian Authority must “reform” and be a
“credible partner for peace” to achieve “two states, living side
by side, in peace and security.” While unobjectionable, the words
seem embalmed from the aftermath of the 1993 Oslo Accords, which
ostensibly traded Palestinian recognition of Israel for Palestinian
self-determination.

By the time I worked in Barack Obama’s White House, Israel was a
regional military superpower. Israeli settlements mushroomed across
the West Bank. A growing enterprise of security barriers, checkpoints
and restrictions on work and freedom of movement consigned
Palestinians to a suppressed existence. Hamas controlled Gaza, which
was strangled by a permanent Israeli blockade and devastated by
episodic wars. The Palestinian Authority governed less than half the
West Bank and was delegitimized by its corruption and cooperation with
Israeli security forces.

In Washington, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and allied
organizations insisted that there be no daylight between the American
president and the Israeli prime minister, placing the burden on Mr.
Obama to fall in line with Mr. Netanyahu. Through those years, Mr.
Netanyahu excoriated Mr. Obama’s foreign policy, particularly any
efforts to define the borders of a Palestinian state and his pursuit
of a nuclear deal with Iran. This put many Democrats in the awkward
position of seeking support from organizations including AIPAC donors
and affiliated PACs, which spent tens of millions of dollars to attack
a Democratic president’s policies and consistently undermined
efforts to achieve a two-state solution.

In 2009, Mr. Netanyahu paid lip service to the potential for a
Palestinian state; by 2015, he was promising that there would be no
Palestinian state on his watch
[[link removed]].
This captures the futility of our two efforts to resolve the conflict
during the Obama era. In both cases, Mr. Netanyahu seemed more intent
on blaming
[[link removed]]
the Palestinians
[[link removed]]
for the failure of talks than on achieving peace. In short, by 2016,
those Democratic talking points (which I had routinely used) were a
smoke screen — a stale formula to be used in Washington rather than
a description of reality in the Middle East.

[Standing behind lecterns, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel
and President Barack Obama reach out to shake hands, at a press
conference with Israeli and American flags behind them.]
Mr. Netanyahu excoriated President Barack Obama’s foreign
policy.Credit...Saul Loeb/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

If Democrats had any illusions about Mr. Netanyahu’s approach to
politics, the first Trump administration should have resolved them.
After Mr. Trump abandoned the Oslo consensus and moved the U.S.
Embassy to Jerusalem, Mr. Netanyahu and AIPAC showered him with
adulation. Yet when Mr. Trump rolled out the Abraham Accords
normalizing relations between Israel and some autocratic Arab states,
many Democrats credulously heralded it as a “peace” agreement even
though it didn’t end any wars and it sidelined the Palestinians.

After Mr. Biden clinched the Democratic nomination for president in
2020, I supported an effort to insert language into the party’s
platform that referred to the Israeli “occupation” of the West
Bank and pledged to restrict assistance to Israel if it annexed the
Palestinian territories. That effort was rejected, reinforcing the
message that Democrats were unwilling to oppose Israeli policies even
if they ran directly counter to long-held Democratic Party positions.

In the battle between democracy and autocracy that shadowed the Biden
presidency, it was clear what side Mr. Netanyahu was on. Following a
now-familiar authoritarian playbook, he clamped down on civil society
[[link removed]],
attacked independent media
[[link removed]], embraced
an increasingly violent settler movement
[[link removed]]
and tried to neuter Israeli courts
[[link removed]]
— prompting huge protests. Yet the centerpiece of Mr. Biden’s
Middle East policy remained the Abraham Accords, particularly an
initiative to bring Saudi Arabia into the arrangement without the
creation of a Palestinian state.

Then came Oct. 7. Suddenly, American Jews were confronted by images of
a pogrom in southern Israel and the shadow of rising antisemitism in
the United States coming from the far right and the far left.

[A kibbutz lies in ruins.]
After Oct. 7, American Jews were confronted by images of a pogrom in
southern Israel, in kibbutzim like this one, and the shadow of rising
antisemitism.Credit...William Keo for The New York Times

That trauma need not have led inexorably to American support for an
Israeli policy of vengeance. Almost immediately after Oct. 7, top
Israeli leaders were referring to Palestinians in Gaza as “human
animals
[[link removed]]”
living in an “evil city
[[link removed]],”
and cutting off [[link removed]]
access to food and water while bombarding Hamas fighters and civilians
alike.

Part of what was so maddening about how events played out was how
predictable it all was. When the Biden administration eventually urged
restraint, it was castigated
[[link removed]]
as insufficiently pro-Israel and the weapons continued to flow. When
cease-fires were near, Mr. Netanyahu sustained the war
[[link removed]]
to hold his far-right coalition together, even as polling found a
majority of Israelis
[[link removed]]
supported ending the war in exchange for the remaining Israeli
hostages. When Democratic lawmakers protested, AIPAC and its
affiliates channeled Republican money
[[link removed]]
into Democratic primaries
[[link removed]]
to defeat them.

Few Democrats embraced Israel’s conduct, but many chose to emphasize
a story of Palestinian terrorism and rejection of peace. That instinct
is part of the problem. Yes, Yasir Arafat was a difficult interlocutor
at the 2000 Camp David Summit. Does that justify the relentless
displacement of Palestinians in the West Bank ever since? Yes, Hamas
has engaged in abhorrent acts of terrorism. Does that warrant dropping
2,000-pound U.S.-made bombs
[[link removed]] on refugee camps full
of children?

Today, no one can deny that the Israeli government prevented aid
[[link removed]] from reaching Gaza,
used force against civilians well beyond the laws of war
[[link removed]]
and destroyed most of the Gaza Strip. Those facts led many scholars
[[link removed]],
human rights
[[link removed]]
organizations and U.N. bodies
[[link removed]]
to conclude that Israel committed genocide, using weapons supplied by
the U.S. — a moral stain that cannot be removed.

Yet many Democrats are left trapped in a no-man’s land sticking to
talking points detached from the reality of the Middle East, the rise
of global authoritarianism and the far-right direction of both Israeli
and American politics. If you believe a Palestinian child is equal in
dignity and worth to an Israeli or American child, it is no longer
possible to support this Israeli government while hiding behind
platitudes about peace.

[Palestinian children hold out plates, while waiting for a meal at a
charity kitchen in the Gaza Strip.]
Children at a charity kitchen in the Gaza Strip in late July. By early
August, the U.N. was estimating that one in three Gazans were going
without food for days at a time.Credit...Agence France-Presse —
Getty Images

VOTERS GRASP THIS REALITY. Polls have shown that only a third
[[link removed]]
of Democrats have a favorable view of Israel, down from 73 percent in
2014. Majorities
[[link removed]] of Americans
opposed providing military assistance to the Israeli government this
summer, and 77 percent of Democrats agree that a genocide has taken
place in Gaza. More than 60 percent of American Jews
[[link removed]]
agree that Israel committed war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza,
even though a large majority believe that Israel’s existence is
vital.

Democratic politicians have begun to respond. This summer, a majority
[[link removed]]
of Democratic senators voted to block arms transfers to Israel.
Several dozen House Democrats have recently called for U.S.
recognition
[[link removed]]
of a Palestinian state. More
[[link removed]]
Democrats are refusing to take AIPAC money. Yet a tortured debate
continues, exemplified by the refusal
[[link removed]]
of some Democratic leaders to back the Democratic nominee for mayor in
New York City, disavow
[[link removed]]
AIPAC or stop arming Mr. Netanyahu.

It is not healthy for a party to be this out of step with its own
voters and stated beliefs. The simplest thing to do would be the right
thing: refuse to provide military assistance to a government that has
committed war crimes; support the International Criminal Court in its
work, whether it is focused on Vladimir Putin or Benjamin Netanyahu;
oppose any effort by Israel to annex the West Bank or ethnically
cleanse the Gaza Strip; invest in an alternative Palestinian
leadership from Hamas that can ultimately govern a Palestinian state;
stand up for democracy in Israel as in the United States.

Yes, there must be a big tent over the movement to restore American
democracy. But that movement cannot succeed if it is beholden to
groups like AIPAC that finance far-right politics.

Will taking these positions quickly resolve the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict? No, but they would offer a blueprint to both a different
future in the Middle East and align the Democratic Party’s foreign
policy with its core convictions.

Some will argue that these positions endanger Israel and the Jewish
diaspora. But that only holds if you believe that the current course
will keep Israel and the Jewish diaspora safe. I believe the opposite
is true.

[Protesters wearing red shirts in the lobby of Trump Towers, with a
gold escalator on the left side of the frame]
Jewish Voice for Peace protested inside Trump Tower in March. More
than 60 percent of American Jews agree that Israel committed war
crimes against Palestinians in Gaza.Credit...Mark Peterson for The New
York Times

Because of its actions, Israel is profoundly isolated, and it will
only become more so if the status quo holds. Instead of empowering the
Israeli right by capitulating to its actions, Democrats should be a
source of solidarity for Israelis who want a genuine alternative to
Mr. Netanyahu and his coalition. That requires a willingness to use
leverage, not a promise to relinquish it.

Of course, there is antisemitism amid Israel’s critics that must be
condemned, but the charge is now applied so broadly that it is being
debased. This normalizes vile conspiracy theories about Jews by
lumping them together with legitimate critiques of Israeli policy.

The Trump administration’s relentless claims that Israel’s critics
are antisemitic also obscures the danger posed by the ascent of
right-wing ethnonationalists across the West. If you believe a
19-year-old Jewish college student chanting “Free Palestine” is
more dangerous than the vice president of the United States implying
that Germans should embrace the far-right party Alternative for
Germany
[[link removed]],
then you’re drawing the wrong lessons from history.

Some political support may be lost if Democrats distance themselves
from Israel, particularly among donors. But Democrats can make clear
that they are willing to support a future Israeli government if it
aligns its policies with humane and democratic policies.

Moreover, the political risks are overstated. Large majorities
[[link removed]] of Jewish Americans
[[link removed]]
continued to vote for Democrats in recent elections despite the fact
that Republicans relentlessly sought to use Israel as a wedge issue.
By taking the moral high ground, the Democratic Party could bring new
voters into its coalition and show that it understands the times we
are living through.

Voters want authentic leaders willing to take principled stands —
leaders willing to fight for them and against corrupt strongmen
wherever they are.

Many Democrats will never embrace the views on Israel of Zohran
Mamdani, New York’s mayor-elect. But one reason New Yorkers believed
he would fight to lower costs is that they knew he had core
convictions. His willingness to be pilloried by powerful people about
his views on Israel — including President Trump and some of his
billionaire backers — showed that he was not afraid to stand up for
his beliefs. By contrast, the familiar pandering to pro-Israel voters
by Mr. Mamdani’s main opponent in the mayoral race, Andrew Cuomo —
including volunteering for Mr. Netanyahu’s legal defense team —
did not come across as particularly courageous or authentic.

The hug Bibi strategy showed that the seemingly safest path can become
the most dangerous — as a matter of policy, politics and morality.
Particularly in an age of authoritarianism, politicians cannot ask
people to face hard realities while avoiding discomfort themselves. A
renewed Democratic Party must be rooted in a moral vision that is all
too absent in the world. Sometimes, to win, you must show that there
are principles for which you are prepared to lose.

_Ben Rhodes is a contributing Opinion writer. He was a deputy national
security adviser under President Barack Obama. He is the  author,
most recently, of “After the Fall: The Rise of Authoritarianism in
the World We’ve Made.”_

* Gaza
[[link removed]]
* Democratic Party
[[link removed]]
* Israeli right-wing
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Bluesky [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]