NYT’s Thomas Friedman is Wrong on US-Israel Relationship Reassessment Say High-Ranking Officials

Edited by: Fern Sidman

(World Israel News & TJVNews.com) – Recent assertions by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, suggesting that the United States is contemplating a reassessment of its ties with Israel, have been refuted by high-ranking officials from both Israel and the United States, as was reported on Wednesday by the World Israel News web site.  The alleged reassessment was attributed to a perceived divergence of interests and values between the two allies, particularly with regards to the issue of Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria and the prospects of a two-state solution. However, officials have denied any knowledge of such a reassessment, stating that even if it were to occur, it would not be unprecedented in the history of US-Israel relations, as was reported by World Israel News.

WIN also reported that a senior Israeli diplomatic official, speaking on condition of anonymity, firmly rejected claims of an imminent reassessment of the US government’s policy towards Israel. The official stated that they were not aware of any decision regarding a reassessment and emphasized that such a move, if taken, would not be unprecedented. WIN reported that historical examples were cited, including similar reassessments undertaken by previous US administrations, such as those led by such past US Presidents as Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, and both George Bush Sr. and George W. Bush Jr.

The Israeli official acknowledged the existence of disagreements between the American administration and Israel on various key issues. These disagreements encompassed the creation of a Palestinian state, the US’s stance on rejoining the Iran nuclear deal, and Prime Minister Netanyahu’s approach to the “no surprises” policy regarding Israeli actions against Iran, as was reported by World Israel News. However, the official emphasized that differing viewpoints on these matters did not necessarily imply an imminent reassessment of the broader US-Israel relationship, the report indicated.

A spokesperson from the US National Security Council also denied Friedman’s claims, stating that there was no discussion of any formal reassessment of the relationship between the United States and Israel, as was reported by WIN.  While acknowledging policy disagreements that exist, the spokesperson emphasized that no plans were in place for a comprehensive reassessment of the bilateral ties.

Moreover, WIN also reported that Friedman’s column posited that if a reassessment were to take place, it would likely affect the US stance towards Israel in global platforms, such as the United Nations. However, the denial by the US National Security Council spokesperson implies that any potential reassessment would not disrupt existing intelligence or military collaboration between the two countries, the report said.

As the situation unfolds, it remains to be seen whether any significant changes will occur in the dynamics between these key allies.

Avi Pazner,  a retired Israeli diplomat and former World Chairman of Keren Hayesod – United Israel Appeal told i24 News that, “We have to watch carefully what Friedman writes as the causes of the tension without falling into a fear of a reassessment like the one of 1975.”

It seems that Friedman, however, does have Joe Biden’s ear when it pertains to Israel. Because Friedman has crafted a dubious reputation of presenting Israel in a very harsh and mendacious manner throughout his career as a correspondent in the Jewish State, he has the ability to peddle his nefarious anti-Israel agenda to high ranking officials in the US State Department, who have their own anti-Israel proclivities and others in the executive branch of government.

Haaretz reported in January of this year that Friedman called upon President Biden to actively engage in Israel’s internal political battle. In a recent article published in the New York Times, Friedman expressed concern over the growing influence of right-wing ministers in Israel’s new government who he believes are hostile to American values and the Democratic Party, Haaretz reported. While acknowledging the limitations of intervention, Friedman argued that Biden’s involvement could potentially guide Israel towards a healthier path and prevent further deterioration.

Friedman highlighted the objectives of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, particularly its pursuit of effectively annexing the Israeli heartland, better known as Judea and Samaria and curbing the power of the judiciary. Friedman described Israel’s High Court of Justice as a vital safeguard for human rights, protecting the interests of minorities including the LGBTQ community, Palestinians, and members of the Reform and Conservative movements, as was reported by Haaretz. Friedman warned that Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s proposed reforms, which seek to allow the Knesset to easily override court rulings, would effectively transfer control of the judiciary to the executive branch, resembling authoritarian tendencies seen in countries like Turkey and Hungary.

Friedman contrasted his position with that of U.S. Ambassador to Israel Tom Nides, who declined to express an opinion on Levin’s plan, emphasizing that the United States should not interfere in Israel’s judicial process, the Haaretz report said. Nides argued that the Israeli public should have the opportunity to articulate their support or concerns regarding the proposed reforms, as lecturing them would not be conducive to the close friendship and shared values between the two nations.

In stark contrast, Friedman exhorted President Biden to take a more forceful approach. He advocated for the President to convey to Netanyahu, without ambiguity, that he is disregarding American interests and values. According to Friedman, Israel’s changing character necessitates a caring but firm declaration from Biden that the ongoing changes contravene America’s core principles, as was reported in Haaretz back in January. Friedman implored the President not to remain silent and not to let the United States become mere “useful idiots” in the face of these developments.