Some of it has to do with Israel. But a lot more has to do with America.
May 15, 2018
Few words cause more concern among pundits and policymakers than “polarization.” Poll after poll shows Americans sharply divided on seemingly every issue, from climate change and immigration to international trade and alliances. This lack of common ground raises the specter of a country that will sharply yo-yo every time the government changes hands, exacerbating instability and division.
Support for Israel has not been spared this trend in American life. As the following graph shows, Israel has become a partisan issue rather than a matter of consensus. In the 1980s and ’90s, Democrats and Republicans supported Israel in nearly equal measure. In the 21st century, they divided. Now, 79 percent of Republicans sympathize with Israel, compared to just 27 percent of Democrats.
For anyone who wishes Israel well — whether they support its present government wholly, partly, or not at all, and whatever their views on solutions to its various conflicts — this trend is worrying news.
But a sense of proportion is in order here.
Israel has been around for 70 years, and while its relations with the United States have been generally positive, there have been some ups and downs. Some Democratic presidents were favorable to the country, such as Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson, and some were critical, like Jimmy Carter. The same is true for Republicans. Dwight Eisenhower’s first term is generally considered one of the coolest periods in relations between the White House and Jerusalem (the second term saw a slight warming), though later Republicans presidents, such as George W. Bush, were more supportive.
American opinion on Israel has also varied. While public opinion has tracked favorably and consistently, it shot up in 1967 following the Six Day War and again during the Gulf War in 1991, but reached relative nadirs in times of controversy, such as the First Lebanon War and the First Intifada in the 1980s.
While this should not be a cause for complacency among Israel supporters today, we need to realize that declines happen, relations between countries ebb and flow, and what went down could go back up.
The Beginning of Polarization
Polarization on Israel started with a massive increase in Republican support under George W. Bush. As Pew notes, support for Israel among both parties was about the same in 2000, with a slight edge for Republicans. That changed after 9/11, with a significant increase that has strengthened over time.
Both left-wing and right-wing commentators connect this surge in support with the war on terror. The GOP rebranded itself after 9/11 as the party of robust (some might say overly aggressive) national security and patriotism, and a country that was also fighting Islamist suicide bombings seemed a natural ally.
While some connect increased Republican support for Israel to the neoconservative cause and the invasion of Iraq, this thesis is harder to support. Republicans’ favorable opinion of Israel remained steady even as their support for the Iraq war declined significantly.
Evangelicalism alone cannot explain the early-2000s surge. While evangelical Christians strongly support Israel, they’ve been a mainstay of the GOP for decades. Support from the Religious Right has added fuel to an already speeding motor.
With some important exceptions, the Democrats didn’t sour on Israel so much as not get swept up in Republican enthusiasm. Democrats’ opinion of Israel remained pretty steady throughout the 2000s, despite many controversial events including the Second Intifada, Disengagement (i.e. the removal of Israeli troops and settlements from the Gaza Strip), the Second Lebanon War, and Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. Democratic support remained as it was before — favorable but critical, and not instinctively supportive of all Israeli policies.
The Obama-Bibi Clash of Wills
When the full story of relations between President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu is published, it will be a fascinating read. It will portray the clash between two highly intelligent, strong-willed people, with divergent philosophies of how the world works.
However, many pundits identify this Obama-Bibi clash as the cause, or at least an accelerant, of the partisan split on Israel we’re now seeing. According to this argument, verbal barbs, mutual accusations of meddling in each other’s elections, and Netanyahu’s 2015 speech to Congress opposing the Iran Deal unraveled the bipartisan consensus on Israel, dangerously making it a cause of Republicans alone.
However, while Netanyahu angered Democratic elites, there is little sign general Democratic support for Israel shifted all that much during most of this period, ego clashes notwithstanding.
As shown above, polarization began in the early 2000s when Netanyahu was a private citizen, even if a well-known one. While he would later serve in ministerial positions in Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s cabinet in 2003–2006, the 2006 Israeli election reduced his Likud party to a rump, and Bibi’s influence on American politics was accordingly small. It may be convenient to “read history backwards” and make him the villain of the story, but it does not fit the facts. Netanyahu became prime minister again in 2009 and capitalized on American polarization when it served his interests, but he did not create it.
This is true even when it comes to his Iran Deal speech. Pilloried by many Democratic officials and pundits as disrespectful to the president and nakedly partisan, Netanyahu’s address does not appear to have made a lasting impression on the Democratic public. Despite the speech, Democratic support for Israel held steady. A year later, in April 2016, 43 percent of Democrats supported Israel — similar levels as the 1990s, and in 2009 at the start of Obama’s presidency.
The Crash
From 2016 to 2018, Democratic opinion on Israel collapsed. But why did it stay in the moderately pro-Israel range during controversial events in the region and suddenly crash, especially when no serious hostilities occurred?
One aspect is Trump and the breach he engendered to “take a side” for or against him — and subsequently GOP positions as a whole — in a more drastic manner than under Bush or Obama. For example, polling on Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem shows a stark partisan divide. This is likely the middle of a process that started during the 2016 election. Polarization has thus taken another victim.
Another cause is a long-term process taking place in America: the relative decline of largely, though not exclusively white religious affiliation and the increase in Hispanic Catholics. According to polls, Hispanic Catholics and the religiously unaffiliated view Israel less favorably than white Catholics and protestants. As demographics shift, and with Hispanics and the religiously unaffiliated concentrating in the Democratic Party, these views appear more prominently in polls.
The third and final factor is the increase in the number of people who identify as liberal Democrats as opposed to moderate or centrist. Liberals tend to be more critical and skeptical towards Israel — and have been since 2000. As the following graph shows, liberals’ support for Israel dipped during controversial events, such as the Second Intifada.
About 20 percent of self-identified liberals thought Barack Obama was too pro-Israel. They likely cheered when the Democratic Party platform became more favorable towards the Palestinians in the wake of Bernie Sanders’ insurgency.
Given that millennials, the emerging largest voting bloc in the country, are overrepresented among the religiously unaffiliated, liberals, and Hispanics, there is trouble ahead for support for Israel. The middle-ground approach the Democratic Party held until just two years ago seems unlikely to return.
Israel’s actions throughout this period surely play a role — a point we can and should debate — but the growing partisan divide on Israel is also the result of long-term internal American processes over which the Jewish state has little influence. America has changed and is changing in important ways, though which changes are permanent and which depend on who is in office remain to be seen.
American public opinion on Israel is a challenge that must be met, but not yet a catastrophe for Israel’s well-wishers, whatever their politics. A critical and “balanced” approach does not necessarily mean an adversarial one. At least, not yet.
Comments
Post a Comment