Asked about the U.S. relationship with Israel during the All-In Podcast Summit, Vice President JD Vance made some remarks that are raising eyebrows.
He said, “I think that, more than frankly any president in the last 40 years, [Trump] has shown a willingness to actually part ways with Bibi Netanyahu when he feels like the interests of the American people are different from the interests of the government of Israel … By the way, you see a similar push back when the president makes the argument that he’s made about NATO, which is yes, obviously a lot of important relationships, a lot of important partnerships in NATO, but that doesn’t mean that we’re going to completely make our European foreign policy subservient to NATO in the same way that we cannot let our Middle Eastern foreign policy be subservient to the state of Israel.”
Because it’s currently fashionable on the political left and reactionary right to suggest that Israel and “the Jews” control our country, Vance’s use of “subservient” seemed like a dog whistle to many. Whatever his remarks were, they were at least partly wrong. And also, partly right.
U.S. policy has never been subservient to Israel. In fact, Washington has repeatedly disagreed with Israeli governments and used American leverage when interests required it.
In 1981, Ronald Reagan proceeded with the sale of AWACS aircraft to Saudi Arabia despite strong Israeli opposition. Reagan also suspended deliveries of F-16 aircraft after Israel destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor. Later administrations likewise exerted pressure on Israel.
When Saddam Hussein fired SCUD missiles at Israel in the 1991 Gulf War, George H.W. Bush blocked Israel from responding with airstrikes.
In 2004, former President George W. Bush strong-armed Israel into leaving Gaza and allowing Hamas to run in elections, leading to the takeover of the strip by the terrorists. A decade later, Barack Obama pushed through a “deal” allowing Iran to become a nuclear threshold country and develop ballistic missiles.
Even in the wake of the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre, former President Joe Biden implemented an arms embargo on Israel as it was trying to rescue hostages, including Americans, from the terror dungeons of Gaza.
On the other hand, U.S. policy has, in a sense, been subservient to European countries. NATO is a treaty alliance, and Article 5 creates a collective defense commitment.
American troops are stationed throughout Europe to protect it from Russian aggression. We spend tens of billions of dollars to pay those troops, house and arm them, and maintain those bases.
The U.S. should neither dominate nor kowtow to our allies. Neither of these paradigms has benefited U.S. interests nor been successful.
This is where Vance gets it right: President Donald Trump is pursuing a more realistic and respectful policy. He is building a dynamic where allies act like independent sovereign nations pursuing their own interests and align where those interests overlap.
An ally that can defend itself, contribute military power, share intelligence, develop useful technology, and act decisively can become a meaningful strategic partner.
Israel has demonstrated substantial military and intelligence capabilities, while Ukraine has demonstrated the capacity to fight for its own sovereignty. Both illustrate why American assistance can have greater strategic value when it reinforces partners that are actively pursuing their own security.
These are allies vigorously pursuing their interests to the benefit of the United States. We help them with weapons, advisers, and even kinetic action — not because we are subservient to them, but because it benefits us.
America does not need allies who are unable or unwilling to protect their own interests. We don’t need more allies like Saudi Arabia and Qatar in the Middle East, or France and England in Europe.
JD VANCE’S ECONOMIC AGENDA IS JUST SOCIALISM WRAPPED IN A NATIONALIST FLAG
Washington should not expect Israel to subordinate its security decisions to American preferences any more than America should subordinate its Middle Eastern policy to Israel. It also means European governments should not expect the United States to carry responsibilities that they can reasonably carry themselves.
Allies should remain sovereign, pursue their own interests, bear meaningful responsibility for their security, and cooperate with the United States where their interests converge. That is not the abandonment of alliances. It is a more demanding definition of what an alliance means.
EJ Kimball is the Director of Policy and Strategic Operations at the U.S. Israel Education Association and a foreign policy and national security consultant.