Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer took to the Senate Floor last Thursday to address the continuing war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. Schumer occupies the highest elected position ever attained by a Jew in American history and represents New York State in the Senate, with the largest Jewish population in the United States. Schumer spoke as Congress’ leading Democrat; a life-time defender and supporter of Israel; knowing full well that regardless of what he would say his remarks would engender criticism. The speech in key areas was undoubtedly previewed by the Biden White House. It, therefore, is important to consider the sources as well as the character of the reactions his speech has produced, from Washington, from Israel, and from American Jews.
The obvious similarity in the responses to Schumer’s speech is that most everyone only responded to the portion of the speech of which they approved or disapproved. Very few people except for key decision-makers and analysts heard or read the speech in its entirety. It is a sad statement that except for the opinion makers and leaders, very few people within the affected publics actually read the speech. Had they done so they would have discovered that the speech—except for a few points which will be highlighted—was well balanced.
Most of the public reaction in Israel, in the United States, and among Jews in the U.S. was to the spin given to the speech by numerous media sources. (This is assuming that the various publics actually read media outlets and did not merely form their reactions from the grossly unreliable social media outlets where over 50% of Americans obtain their “news”.)
The Israeli Government led by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu took great umbrage at Schumer’s perceived interference in the Israeli, democratic, electoral process. Bibi accused Schumer of trying to insert himself into the processes of Government by suggesting it was time for the Israeli people to consider choosing a new leader.
As Schumer singled out Netanyahu’s most extreme coalition members, Ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, Bibi was faced with the need to provide political cover for them lest they opt to overthrow the Government. At the same time, those Israelis who have been pushing hardest to prioritize the return of the hostages and a ceasefire (pause) now, found positive hope in Schumer’s remarks.
For American Jews there was a similar breakdown in response to Schumer’s speech. American Jewish leadership and its respective followers have responded to Netanyahu and his indignation with predictable support for the Israeli Government. Those who considered Schumer’s remarks favorably followed the faultline already existing within the American Jewish community.
The response in Washington was complicated. Israeli supporters in Congress were miffed, especially many pro-Israel Democrats. Republicans celebrated the opportunity to tout their pro-Israel credentials—regardless of how disingenuous that might actually be. They reveled in the opportunity to rally more strongly behind Netanyahu than the Democrats and the most prominent Jew in Congress, as well as President Biden.
Leader Schumer’s remarks also had a significant political impact. As the leading Democrat in Congress, he understood the need for President Biden and Democrats running for election or re-election to try to get the internal debate about the war in Gaza within the Democratic Party removed as fast as possible from the political debate. If the debate persists it could have a continuing polarizing impact among progressive Democrats as well as Jewish voters in key States which could pose a serious concern for Democrats in November. Schumer, thus, carried the water on this issue further than the President, himself, wanted to go at least at this time.
Schumer’s overall remarks were thorough and comprehensive. Considering the time he undoubtedly devoted to preparing his speech, it could be argued that the content was totally appropriate, well formulated, and balanced. When neither side is totally happy with a speech it usually suggests that it achieved its goal.
The Majority Leader could have avoided a significant amount of pushback and would have accomplished the same end, if he had avoided naming names. Engaging in an ad hominem attack on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was not necessary. Schumer could have attacked the positions of the Government in general --not the people or the State of Israel—with everyone knowing to whom Schumer was speaking. He could have achieved a more positive response from an even larger audience and avoided some of the fallout, especially among some Israelis and within certain segments of the American Jewish community.
Comments