Covert Contact 104: Alon Pinkas on Israeli-American Relations

I recently had the privilege of speaking with Alon Pinkas, former Foreign Policy Advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. With his impressive diplomatic career, which includes serving as Israel's Consul General in New York and Chief of Staff to several Foreign Ministers, Pinkas brings invaluable perspective to the complex relationship between Israel and the United States. Our conversation revealed fascinating insights into how this critical alliance has evolved and the challenges it faces today.

A Relationship at a Crossroads

What struck me most during our discussion was my guest's candid assessment of where both nations currently stand. He believes both countries are "on the precipice of changing direction" – a transformation that may take time in Israel and could hinge on the upcoming U.S. election, but one that seems increasingly inevitable.

The current political leadership in both countries, according to Pinkas, are "fighting a rearguard battle. They're winning battles here and there, but they're losing the war." It's a provocative assessment that frames current political tensions as the last gasps of a fading approach rather than the beginning of a new normal.

The Myth of Left vs. Right in Israeli Politics

One particularly illuminating point was his explanation of Israel's political landscape. While right-wing parties hold a plurality in the Knesset, they don't have a clear majority. The right-wing vote in Israel isn't merely an ideological position but rather a confluence of several factors: ethnic divisions, socioeconomic differences, geographic disparities, and cultural divides.

Interestingly, even the majority of right-wing voters in Israel acknowledge that the status quo with Palestinians isn't sustainable long-term. They don't support annexation of large Palestinian territories or a one-state model. Their rightward lean comes more from distrust of Palestinian intentions and concerns about security than from hardline expansionist ideology.

The challenge for centrists and moderates seems universal – selling a vision of compromise and cooperation is never as emotionally satisfying as appealing to security fears and cultural identity. As Pinkas put it, "liberalism in general and moderate-centric policy never had strong selling points... It's always easy to go to 'why not?' and 'why we shouldn't do this.' It's soothing. It's nice. It's reinforcing. It's empowering. It's just not smart."

Dangerous Alliances

Perhaps the most concerning trend Pinkas identified is the Israeli government's increasing alignment with fringe elements in American politics. He outlined three problematic alliances that have developed in recent years:

1. Evangelical Christians whose support, while strong, is motivated by theological beliefs about Armageddon rather than Israel's security
2. Certain far-right political elements in the U.S., including nationalist and extremist factions whose pro-Israel stance often stems more from anti-Muslim sentiment than genuine support for Israel's wellbeing
3. The minority of American Jews who lean right (only about 20-25%, with most American Jews consistently voting Democratic)

This strategy threatens two foundational aspects of U.S.-Israel relations: the bipartisan nature of American support for Israel and Israel's traditional avoidance of inserting itself into American domestic politics. Pinkas believes this approach is "hurting Israel in the long term" regardless of who wins the next U.S. election.

Who's Really Been "Good for Israel"?

One of the most fascinating parts of our conversation was about the disconnect between perception and reality regarding which U.S. presidents have been most supportive of Israel. When asked to name the most "Israel-friendly" presidents, most people's answers are detached from reality.

If measured by statements alone, Donald Trump might appear very friendly to Israel. If measured by material help like the $38 billion in aid over 10 years or funding for the Iron Dome missile defense system, Barack Obama stands out. If measured by emotional connection and genuine affection, Bill Clinton would top the list.

But if we consider who helped Israel "when our ass was on fire," as Pinkas colorfully put it, Richard Nixon during the 1973 Yom Kippur War and Barack Obama in 2015-16 were the most crucial allies. This reality contrasts sharply with typical polling of Israeli citizens, who would likely dismiss this assessment.

The Future Requires American Leadership

Despite all the challenges, Pinkas was clear that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be resolved without American involvement. While the responsibility ultimately rests with Israelis and Palestinians, any workable solution requires U.S. mediation, support, and leadership in the Arab world.

The complication is that American influence in both Europe and the Arab world has diminished. Any new administration would need to rebuild that diplomatic clout before becoming an effective broker.

Moreover, the old frameworks may no longer apply. If the two-state solution is no longer viable, and a one-state binational solution is unacceptable, something new must emerge. That requires creative thinking and American leadership that can "change the paradigm" and "think out of the box."

Reflections

What I found most valuable in this conversation was the blend of realism and hope. Yes, the relationship between Israel and the United States faces serious challenges. Yes, the prospect of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict seems remote. But underlying these difficulties is the recognition that current approaches are unsustainable and that new thinking is inevitable.

The ties between our nations remain strong, but they need honest reassessment based on current realities rather than Cold War paradigms or religious narratives. As global priorities shift and both societies evolve, so too must this crucial alliance – not to weaken it, but to ensure it remains relevant and beneficial for generations to come.