RSS
JD Vance’s Foreign Policy Is a Glass Half-Full
Former President Donald Trump has selected Ohio Senator J.D. Vance as his vice-presidential running mate for the 2024 election. Much has been written about Senator Vance’s foreign policy positions — the “good” and the “bad;” however, as Hamlet said, “there is no good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”
To reduce the complexity inherent in foreign policy decisions to a binary choice between good or bad tends to be intellectually lazy and politically expedient. Further, it is almost always more reflective of the judge rather than the judged.
For instance, Senator Vance has been highly critical of US support for Ukraine’s war against Russia. In fact, he said, “I don’t care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other.” Whether that was said with shock value in mind, or he really doesn’t care that Ukraine could fall to Putin is up for debate. But, are we to believe that such a statement accurately or fairly encapsulates what he thinks about Ukraine’s war with Russia?
Rhetoric aside, his foreign policy positions are likely to propel expanding Israel-Europe relations in a steeper direction.
Vance is a notably proud supporter of Israel, and his public statements about Israel are the antithesis of those he makes about Ukraine. He called Israel, “one of the most dynamic and technologically advanced countries in the world” and “[t]he idea that there is ever going to be an American foreign policy that doesn’t care a lot about that slice of the world is preposterous because of who Americans are.” Vance is also on record fully supporting Israel’s prosecution of the war in Gaza until Hamas is dismantled and no longer presents a military threat.
So, what are we to make of Vance? He does not seem to fit squarely in the isolationist camp. His positions have been informed by his military experience fighting in Iraq, and he understands foreign policy to the extent that he lived the consequences of previous US foreign policy decisions. Even on Ukraine, he’s not completely isolationist.
Vance falls in an ascending category of foreign policy thinkers, called conservative realists, a term coined by Elbridge Colby, himself a highly regarded “conservative realist.” In fact, conservative realism helps explain the essential nature of the developing triad between Israel, Europe, and the US, and Vance articulates this quite well.
At the February Munich Conference, Vance said, “[w]e need Europe to play a bigger share of the security role, and that’s not because we don’t care about Europe … it’s because we have to recognize that we live in a world of scarcity,” insinuating that Europe can no longer hold onto “the idea of the American superpower that can do everything all at once.”
In other words, his position on Ukraine could be a function of his belief that Europe must take more responsibility for protecting itself from external threats, because the United States no longer possesses the financial, military, operational, or political resources to allocate towards Europe’s security.
On the other hand, Vance views Israel differently than Ukraine, and considers the US-Israel alliance as the model for a US-Europe alliance. He sums it up by saying, “[w]e have to sort of ask ourselves, what do we want out of our Israeli allies? And more importantly, what do we want out of all of our allies writ large? Do we want clients who depend on us, who can’t do anything without us? Or do we want real allies who can actually advance their interests on their own with America playing a leadership role?”
According to Vance, Israel is relatively self-sufficient, unlike present Europe, where most countries have failed to meet their obligatory 2% of GDP threshold for defense spending. While Europe, writ large, is barely spending enough on its defensive capabilities, Israel is advancing new technologies like the Iron Beam, a laser defensive system that, according to Vance, is “a very important national security objective, and of the United States of America.”
He hasn’t commented on whether he believes that Israel should keep receiving the same level of funding it does from the United States, or if he believes Israel should spend more of its own money on its defenses. However, past may be prologue: Vance criticized the Biden administration for withholding precision munitions to Israel, and Israel already spends more than 7% of GDP on defense spending.
Moreover, the annual $3.8B in military funding the US provides Israel is a pittance compared to the $175B in funding provided to Ukraine in just two years (although this aid includes more than military aid). Additionally, the US did approve another $8.7 billion to Israel from a supplemental act in April 2024.
If we are to read between the lines, Vance considers the Return on Investment from Israel to be significantly more than from Ukraine and would seem inclined to support continued aid to Israel.
Vance is a glass half-full. In other words, while there are aspects of conservative realism that may be concerning, those concerns must be weighed against the potential benefits. Long-term, the benefits to Europe and Israel are likely to be significant.
Europe will be forced to pursue opportunities to enhance their defense, security, and technological capabilities if these countries hope to withstand threats coming from Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea — the “Quartet of Death,” as the British refer to them. This pivot clearly augurs for increased Israel-Europe alignment.
In fact, 21 European countries have joined the European Sky Shield Initiative, a coalition to create a pan European air defense system, all of which is dependent on the inclusion of Israeli technology. Germany has the Arrow 3. Finland acquired David’s Sling, and the Baltic States want to acquire Iron Dome, and these steps are in addition to the robust defense cooperation, intelligence sharing, and other forms of technological advancements taking place between Israel and Europe.
What’s more, as a proponent of the Abraham Accords, Vance’s promotion of them would strengthen the relationships between Europe and Abraham Accords’ countries, thereby offering Europe potential friend-shoring advantages it presently does not possess.
There are still almost four months to go before the US presidential elections, so how this plays out no one knows. However, current trends indicate we will likely see European leaders maneuvering their countries into positions that benefit Israel and the Israel-Europe relationship sooner than later.
David F. Siegel is the President of ELNET-US. With offices across Europe and Israel, ELNET has emerged as the most influential and impactful pro-Israel advocacy organization in Europe.
The post JD Vance’s Foreign Policy Is a Glass Half-Full first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Obituary: Elexis Schloss, 78, an Edmonton entrepreneur and philanthropist who also performed quiet acts of kindness
Elexis (Conn) Schloss, a vibrant entrepreneur and philanthropist who supported a wide array of causes, both in and beyond Edmonton, died in Victoria on Oct. 31. She was 78. Her […]
The post Obituary: Elexis Schloss, 78, an Edmonton entrepreneur and philanthropist who also performed quiet acts of kindness appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
Saudi Arabia Ups Anti-Israel Rhetoric Amid Iran Rapprochement, Raising Questions About Abraham Accords Expansion
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman attends a virtual cabinet meeting from his office in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, May 28, 2024. Photo: Saudi Press Agency/Handout via REUTERS
Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler accused the Israeli military of committing “collective genocide” in Gaza while also pressing Israel to respect Iranian sovereignty, amid reports that Tehran has postponed its planned attack on the Jewish state.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s remarks, made in Riyadh on Monday during a summit of leaders of Islamic nations, underscored the evolving rapprochement between the erstwhile archenemies Iran and Saudi Arabia.
The crown prince, also known by his initials MBS, urged the international community to demand that Israel “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.”
The two regional heavyweights restored relations last year after decades of animosity.
MBS’s anti-Israel rhetoric came days after Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election. For Israel, the statement from Riyadh may signal a setback to the normalization process with Saudi Arabia, a long-sought goal within the framework of the Abraham Accords, brokered by Trump during his first term in the White House, that has seen Israel establish formal ties with several Arab states in recent years.
According to a Sky News Arabia report published two days later and citing Iranian officials, Tehran has shelved a planned third direct strike on Israel, with the delay attributed to possible forthcoming diplomatic talks with Trump. Israel Hayom published a similar report the following day, citing officials in Jerusalem familiar with the matter.
Iranian First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref expressed his hope that the incoming Trump administration would put a stop to Israel’s campaigns against its terrorist proxies, Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
“The American government is the main supporter of the actions of the Zionist regime [Israel], and the world is waiting for the promise of the new government of this country to immediately stop the war against the innocent people of Gaza and Lebanon,” Aref said at Monday’s gathering.
Observers noted that Saudi Arabia’s shift could stem from both domestic and regional considerations. For the kingdom, improving relations with Iran is a strategic move to de-escalate conflicts in Yemen, where both countries have backed opposing sides. By opening diplomatic channels with Iran, Saudi Arabia also aims to reduce its dependence on Western security guarantees amid growing regional autonomy. According to Dr. Eyal Pinko, a Middle East expert who served in Israeli intelligence for more than three decades, Saudi Arabia is also under pressure from France, a major arms supplier, to maintain a moderate stance and promote regional peace.
“Saudi Arabia understands [it] cannot rely on the Americans” for arms, Pinko told The Algemeiner.
For its part, Iran may be seeking closer ties with the Gulf kingdom as a result of recent Israeli operations that have decimated the senior leadership of Hezbollah, Iran’s most influential proxy in the Arab world that has long served as a strategic partner.
“Iran is spreading its bets all around, not to be on one side or another,” Pinko said.
Hezbollah, along with Hamas in Gaza, had in the past been blacklisted as terrorist groups by Riyadh.
The New York Times last month cited a Saudi tycoon with ties to the monarchy as saying that the war in Gaza has “set back any Israeli integration into the region.”
“Saudi Arabia sees that any association with Israel has become more toxic since Gaza,” Ali Shihabi told the newspaper.
In another blow for Saudi-Israel relations, Riyadh announced it would revoke the license of the Saudi news broadcaster, MBC, after it labeled the late Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar a terrorist.
But according to Pinko, the chance of Saudi-Israel normalization is not entirely lost, pending a ceasefire.
“If nothing extreme happens with Iran until Jan. 20 [when Trump takes office], I believe that the Abraham Accords will come back to the table,” he said.
The post Saudi Arabia Ups Anti-Israel Rhetoric Amid Iran Rapprochement, Raising Questions About Abraham Accords Expansion first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Germany Opposes EU Foreign Policy Chief’s Proposal to Suspend Dialogue With Israel
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock speaks during a session of the lower house of parliament Bundestag, in Berlin, Germany, Oct. 10, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Lisi Niesner
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Thursday publicly rejected a proposal by the European Union’s foreign policy chief to suspend regular political dialogue with Israel in response to the Jewish state’s ongoing military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza.
“We are always in favor of keeping channels of dialogue open. Of course, this also applies to Israel,” the German Foreign Office said of top EU official Josep Borrell’s plans, according to the German news agency dpa.
The Foreign Office added that, while the political conversations under the EU-Israel Association Council provide a regular opportunity to strengthen relations and, in recent months, discuss the provision of humanitarian aid to Gaza, severing that mechanism would be counterproductive.
“Breaking off dialogue, however, will not help anyone, neither the suffering people in Gaza, nor the hostages who are still being held by Hamas, nor all those in Israel who are committed to dialogue,” the statement continued.
Borrell on Wednesday proposed the suspension of dialogue in a letter to EU foreign ministers ahead of their meeting this coming Monday in Brussels, citing “serious concerns about possible breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza.” He also wrote, “Thus far, these concerns have not been sufficiently addressed by Israel.”
The regular dialogues that Borrell is seeking to break off were enshrined in a broader agreement on relations between the EU and Israel, including extensive trade ties, that was implemented in 2000.
“In light of the above considerations, I will be tabling a proposal that the EU should invoke the human rights clause to suspend the political dialogue with Israel,” Borrell wrote.
A suspension would need the approval of all 27 EU countries, an unlikely outcome. According to Reuters, multiple countries objected when a senior EU official briefed ambassadors in Brussels on the proposal on Wednesday.
While some EU countries, such as Spain and Ireland, have been fiercely critical of Israel since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, others such as the Czech Republic and Hungary have been more supportive.
Hamas, which rules Gaza, launched the ongoing conflict with its invasion of southern Israel last Oct. 7. During the onslaught, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists murdered 1,200 people, wounded thousands more, and kidnapped over 250 hostages while perpetrating mass sexual violence and other atrocities.
Israel responded with a military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military and governing capabilities in neighboring Gaza.
Israel says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, noting its efforts to evacuate areas before it targets them and to warn residents of impending military operations with leaflets, text messages, and other forms of communication. However, Hamas has in many cases prevented people from leaving, according to the Israeli military.
Another challenge for Israel is Hamas’s widely recognized military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations, direct attacks, and store weapons.
Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said last month that Israel has delivered over 1 million tons of aid, including 700,000 tons of food, to Gaza since it launched its military operation a year ago. He also noted that Hamas terrorists often hijack and steal aid shipments while fellow Palestinians suffer.
The Israeli government has ramped up the supply of humanitarian aid into Gaza in recent weeks under pressure from the United States, which has expressed concern about the plight of civilians in the war-torn enclave.
Meanwhile, Borrell has been one of the EU’s most outspoken critics of Israel over the past year. Just six weeks after Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks, he drew a moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas while speaking to the European Parliament, accusing both of having carried out “massacres” while insisting that it is possible to criticize Israeli actions “without being accused of not liking the Jews.”
Borrell’s speech followed a visit to the Middle East the prior week. While in Israel, he delivered what the Spanish daily El Pais described as the “most critical message heard so far from a representative of the European Union regarding Israel’s response to the Hamas attack of Oct. 7.”
“Not far from here is Gaza. One horror does not justify another,” Borrell said at a joint press conference alongside then-Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen. “I understand your rage. But let me ask you not to let yourself be consumed by rage. I think that is what the best friends of Israel can tell you, because what makes the difference between a civilized society and a terrorist group is the respect for human life. All human lives have the same value.”
Months later, in March of this year, Borrell claimed that Israel was imposing a famine on Palestinian civilians in Gaza and using starvation as a weapon of war. His comments came a few months before the United Nations Famine Review Committee (FRC), a panel of experts in international food security and nutrition, rejected the assertion that northern Gaza was experiencing famine, citing a lack of evidence. Borrell’s comments prompted outrage from Israel.
In August, Borrell pushed EU member states to impose sanctions on some Israeli ministers.
Monday’s meeting in Brussels will be the last that Borrell will chair before ending his five-year term as the EU’s foreign policy chief.
The post Germany Opposes EU Foreign Policy Chief’s Proposal to Suspend Dialogue With Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.