Foreign Minister and Alternate Prime Minister Yair Lapid met on Monday with a visiting congressional delegation of Democrats on Monday organized by J Street, drawing backlash from right-wing politicians.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The delegation was comprised of Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Ct.) Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Melania Stansbury (D-N.M.) and Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.). J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami was also in attendance.

On the Israeli side, Lapid was joined by Transportation Minister Merav Michaeli (Labor), Public Security Minister Omer Bar-Lev (Labor), Regional Cooperation Minister Issawi Frej (Meretz), and Environmental Protection Minister Tamar Zandberg (Meretz).

The liberal Israel lobby group had been shunned for years by former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu because it works to undermine official Israeli policy on a broad range of issues.

An Israeli government official told Israel Hayom that "J Street is the only lobby that defines itself as 'pro-Israel,' but actively opposes the policies of the [various] governments – whether this means actively supporting a return to the nuclear deal with Iran, or promoting members of Congress who oppose Iron Dome funding. When other lobbies don't agree with Israel on a certain issue, they simply keep quiet and don't take a position. [J Street] are the only ones who come out against [Israel]. Therefore the meetings with them, until [Monday], were at the lower levels."

In a tweet, Lapid thanked the delegation "for supporting the replenishment of the Iron Dome missile-defense system, and we discussed the importance of continuing to strengthen the US-Israel relationship."

This evening at the Knesset, I met with a delegation of Democratic members of Congress. I thanked them for supporting the replenishment of the Iron Dome missile defense system, and we discussed the importance of continuing to strengthen the US-Israel relationship. pic.twitter.com/DBiJI8gDcL

— יאיר לפיד - Yair Lapid (@yairlapid) November 8, 2021

According to J Street, the trip emphasizes "balance and providing equal time to Israeli and Palestinian voices, the delegation will meet with ministers in the Israeli government, Members of Knesset, and representatives of the IDF, as well as with leaders of the Palestinian Authority, and with a wide range of Israeli and Palestinian civil society leaders, issue experts and activists."

DeLauro, who heads the House Appropriations Committee, helped spearhead the $1 billion resolution on Israel's Iron Dome missile-defense system in September after funding had been removed from a larger government spending bill over the objections of several progressive Democratic lawmakers. This incident touched off criticism among Republicans and even some moderate Democrats over the Democratic party's commitment to Israel.

Among others in the delegation is Pocan, who has been an outspoken critic of Israel in recent months. In May, during Israel's 11-day conflict with Hamas in Gaza, he led a group of nearly a dozen progressive Democrats in censuring Israel's policies towards the Palestinians on the House floor, accusing Israel of "disproportionate discrimination and treatment" of the Palestinians.

Bowman, who has been included as a member of the far-left "Squad," has been critical of Israel and called for restricting aid to the Jewish state, though recently voted for funding for the Iron Dome. Last year, Bowman ousted prominent pro-Israel Democrat Eliot Engel in a heated primary.

Likud MK Dr. Shlomo Karai said in response to the meeting that the "radical left-wing government continues to strengthen our enemies at the expense of those who love us. J Street has proven time and again that it doesn't care one iota about Israel's best interests. Just the opposite, every time it has been able to choose whether to stands alongside Israel or our enemies, it has chosen the worst of our enemies. This too, as with the dangerous diplomatic process, is on the hands of [Prime Minister Naftali] Bennett and [Interior Minister Ayelet] Shaked, [Justice Minister Gideon] Sa'ar and [Housing and Construction Minister Ze'ev] Elkin, and with their full backing. This is the same Bennett who in the past praised [former President Reuven] Rivlin for refusing to meet with them. The man knows no bounds. In the next election, the public will make sure they pay the price of this negligence and neglect."

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

It should be noted that Bennett did meet Monday with the Democratic delegation but refused to meet with J Street representatives.

Likud faction chairman MK Yariv Levin in response to Lapid's meeting with J Street: "Alternate Prime Minister Yair Lapid's meeting with representatives of the radical left-wing organization J Street, which actively works to impair American support for Israeli positions, and whose members supported the dangerous nuclear deal with Iran, proves yet again … this government is not 10 degrees to the right. It is 180 degrees to the left."

Lapid's bureau said in a statement: "The foreign minister met with a delegation of important congressmen. The minister's policy is to meet and speak with whoever has influence and to try convincing them that Israel's positions are just."

Parts of this article were reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post FM Lapid meets members of left-wing group J Street, draws backlash appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is featured as one of the speakers at this year's J Street national conference.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The event, which stretches over two days, is set to begin on Sunday, with Abbas delivering his remarks in the time slot between 2:00 and 2:30 p.m. Eastern time -- along with Israel's former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and a performance by the Jerusalem Youth Chorus.

The address will be pre-recorded to be displayed to those attending the virtual event, with some 4,000 reportedly registering to take part.

The first day of the conference will also feature a panel on Israel's latest election comprised of Joint List, Meretz and Labor party chiefs, as well as addresses from senior US Democrats: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

The Times of Israel cited a J Street staffer as saying that Abbas plans to reaffirm his commitment to a two-state solution, while also lashing out at Israel over actions allegedly making dents in the prospect of it ever materializing.

Abbas is also expected to praise Washington's recent steps towards re-engagement with the Palestinians, including reinstatement of aid to West Bank and Gaza as well as payments to the UN agency handling the Palestinian refugees.

The administration of US President Joe Biden has made a number of overtures to the Palestinians in a bid to restore the ties that were severed under former President Donald Trump.

Palestinians cut their contacts with the Trump team after the former US leader declared his decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

This article was first published by i24NEWS.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post PA leader Mahmoud Abbas to speak at J Street conference   appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

With the Palestinians refusing to even talk to the administration – let alone negotiate with Israel about implementing the plan's terms – chances of the "deal of the century" solving the conflict remain exactly zero. Trump's opponents see his determination to recognize Israeli sovereignty over all of Jerusalem, as well as the green light his plan gives to the annexation of West Bank settlements, as an outrage. And they dismiss his offer of statehood to the Palestinians – provided that they recognize the legitimacy of the Jewish state and cease support for terrorism – as meaningless.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

In essence, all those denouncing Trump's terms are advising the Palestinians to stick to their refusal to talk until a new American president takes office.

Whatever you think about Trump, it is the worst possible advice anyone could give to the Palestinians.

Unfortunately, this is exactly what many Democrats are doing. The same is true of allegedly "pro-peace" Jewish groups like J Street. Rather than encouraging the Palestinians to start negotiating, the "experts" about the Mideast are applauding their decision to reject Trump's proposal out of hand. Sadly, they are once again serving as enablers for a Palestinian Arab leadership that has, over the course of the last century, failed their people miserably as they pursued a futile war against Zionism.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas stopped talking to the Americans after Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital in December 2017 and then continued to ignore them as the peace plan was drafted. He refused an invitation to the White House and even a phone call from the president, whom he denounced as a "dog" and a "son of a dog." But the key to understanding his stance was his statement that if he were to negotiate on these terms, he would be seen as "a traitor" to the Palestinian people.

The political culture that produced Abbas is one in which any recognition of Israel's legitimacy is not merely a form of treason, but a complete betrayal of Palestinian identity. That's why Abbas was meeting with representatives of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, rather than with Trump and Netanyahu at the White House.

Abbas may think that it's outrageous that he's being asked to accept less than what George W. Bush and Ehud Olmert offered him in 2008, or what Bill Clinton and Ehud Barak offered his predecessor Yasser Arafat in 2000 and 2001. But what Trump's critics forget is that both Abbas and Arafat rejected those offers of Palestinian statehood in almost all of the West Bank, Gaza and a share of Jerusalem. Independence wasn't enough for the Palestinians then. And it's not enough now – and not because the amount of territory they're being offered is slightly less than what was on the table previously. Abbas is saying "no" to Trump for the same reason that the Palestinians have been saying "no" to every compromise that has been mooted to solve the conflict since the 1930s. No Palestinian leader has the courage to make peace with Israel, no matter where its borders are drawn because they remain locked into a war that they have already lost.

Palestinians are right to say that Trump is asking them to surrender. But what they must surrender is their dreams of eliminating Israel. The problem with the plans put forward by Trump's predecessors was not that they weren't generous enough to the Palestinians, but that they refused, as Trump has done, to force them to realize that time wasn't on their side.

Israel tried in the 1993 Oslo Accords to trade "land for peace," but got terror instead. The same was true of Ariel Sharon's withdrawal of every Israeli soldier, settler and settlement from Gaza in August of 2005. The overwhelming majority of Israelis have learned from these failures, and that is why even the Blue and White Party that leads the opposition to Netanyahu largely agrees with him about the need to hold onto security control of the West Bank and to annex portions of it because there is no Palestinian peace partner in sight.

Had the Palestinians accepted Clinton and Barak's offer of peace in 2000, many of the settlements that Trump is allowing Israel to annex would no longer exist. But after two decades of violence and rejectionism, it isn't reasonable to expect Israelis to risk their national security and defense in the same manner they might have done in the past. No American president can make Israel give the Palestinians what they want because their goal isn't a demilitarized state that will live in peace alongside a Jewish state, coupled with the Gaza Strip no longer ruled by Hamas terrorists. The fact that Abbas even cited J Street as a group opposing Trump's plan after he met with terrorists illustrates how utterly counterproductive that group's efforts are to the cause of peace.

With much of the Arab world no longer interested in backing their endless war against Israel, the Palestinians need to understand that Trump's team of former real estate executives turned diplomats is right to think of them as equivalent to a property that is rapidly depreciating in value.

What Trump is offering the Palestinians is the best chance they're going to get to achieve a measure of independence, and eventually even prosperity. Anyone who advises them differently – whether out of disdain for Trump, or because they are fixated on forcing Israel to retreat to the 1967 lines and evicting hundreds of thousands of Israelis from their homes – is merely encouraging them to make the same mistake Palestinians have made every other time they had a chance to end the conflict and move on with their lives. All J Street and the Democrats are giving them is the permission to go on dooming their people to fight an endless war they've already lost.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Trump's critics shouldn't encourage Palestinians to make another mistake appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

"We appreciate the efforts of [US] President [Donald] Trump and his administration to work in consultation with the leaders of the two major Israeli political parties to set forth ideas to resolve the conflict in a way that recognizes our ally's critical security needs," said the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in a statement. "Indeed, both Israeli political leaders view this framework as the basis to restart negotiations with the Palestinians."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The AIPAC statement continued: "We have long believed that direct Israeli-Palestinian diplomacy is essential to create a durable peace and lasting two-state agreement that effectively addresses the concerns of both sides."

At the same time, AIPAC bemoaned that "the Palestinian leadership has continually refused direct talks with Israel for the last several years."

"It is now essential that Palestinians forego the path of violence, boycotts and the criminalization of differences at international forums and return to peace talks with Israel," added the pro-Israel lobby. "We were encouraged to see that the ambassadors from Oman, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates attended the announcement, and we call on the Arab states to play a constructive role in urging the Palestinians to resume negotiations with Israelis."

AIPAC called for "Palestinians to rejoin Israelis at the negotiating table," adding that "a lasting, genuine peace will inevitably require agreement between the parties themselves and tough compromises from both sides."

'A great moment of opportunity for the region'

The Republican Jewish Coalition also approved of the proposal.

The organization's national chairman, former Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), said in a statement that it creates a "realistic path" for the Palestinians to have a state while not compromising on "the requirements that the Palestinians reject terrorism, stop inciting violence, stop their indecent 'pay for slay' program that pays terrorists for their crimes, and end corruption and human-rights abuses."

Coleman continued to remark that the plan "offers challenging steps to both parties, as well as the prospect of great achievements. If this plan can be fully implemented, it will change the face of the Middle East for centuries to come."

Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said Tuesday was a "historic day," and he was encouraged by the proceedings.

"We saw the US-Israel relationship in its full expression – a great moment of opportunity for Palestinians and Israelis, as well as the region," he told Jewish News Syndicate. "Hopefully, the Arab states will support this initiative, and it will be backed by European and other countries that want to see stability and peace in the Middle East. We look forward to meaningful negotiations, and in the interim, the beginning of implementation."

B'nai B'rith International, the Endowment for Middle East Truth and the American Jewish Congress also expressed optimism for the initiative.

"This proposal provides a pathway to achieve a lasting peaceful resolution of this conflict that is well-grounded in a reality that includes Israel's vital security needs," said B'nai B'rith International CEO Daniel Mariaschin. "It should be clear to the Palestinians that this plan will not allow them to run from recognizing and accepting Israel as a Jewish state, a prerequisite for any serious negotiation that might ensue."

EMET founder and president Sarah Stern told JNS, "I really do believe that this is a good plan," citing that it gives Israel control over the Jordan Valley and other land crucial for its border security, while giving the Palestinians "billions of dollars people want to invest in their economy to give hope to their children for a better future."

American Jewish Congress president Jack Rosen said in a statement that the president, as well as his senior adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner, deserves credit for constructing a plan that holds the best interests of Israelis and Palestinians in mind. "What the Palestinian people need most is the chance for economic growth, opportunity and self-sufficiency, and the economic component of the peace plan will facilitate investment, trade and cooperation," he said. "An important part of this will be cooperation with neighboring Arab states, and some of them are already on board."

 'He's ignored one side'

NORPAC national president Ben Chouake told JNS that while the plan is "fair and generous," it won't be accepted by Palestinian leadership.

"Unfortunately, the history of Arab leadership making peace with Israel turns out to be short-lived. King Abdullah I Bin Al Hussein of Jordan, Anwar Sadat of Egypt, King Faisal of Iraq all of whom tried to have peace with Israel were assassinated," he said. "So this is a high bar to overcome especially for [Palestinian Authority] President [Mahmoud] Abbas, who is years overstaying his electoral mandate and has little influence over that mandate."

NORPAC is a bipartisan, multi-candidate political action committee working to strengthen United States support for Israel.

Christians United for Israel founder and Chairman John Hagee said in a statement that "President Trump has shown time and again that he is the most pro-Israel president in US history. This plan reflects that tradition and is the best peace proposal any American administration has ever put forth. The president's vision ensures Israel's defensible borders, a united Jerusalem, sovereignty over biblical holy sites and provides an opportunity for the Palestinians to choose peace."

Meanwhile, J Street and the Jewish Democratic Council of America criticized the proposal, exhibiting skepticism from the get-go.

"Trump claims his plan is 'win-win for both sides,' but he's ignored one side. This is a green light for Israeli annexation of the West Bank, an intentional undermining of a viable two-state solution & another example of Trump using Israel to further his domestic political agenda," tweeted JDCA executive director Halie Soifer.

Trump claims his plan is "win-win for both sides" but he's ignored one side. This is a green light for Israeli annexation of the West Bank, an intentional undermining of a viable two-state solution & another example of Trump using Israel to further his domestic political agenda.

— Halie Soifer (@HalieSoifer) January 28, 2020

J Street did not hold back in its denunciation, writing: "It is absolutely clear that the 'plan' released today by the Trump administration stands zero chance of serving as the basis for renewed diplomacy to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Instead, it is the logical culmination of repeated bad-faith steps this administration has taken to validate the agenda of the Israeli right, prevent the achievement of a viable, negotiated two-state solution and ensure that Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory in the West Bank becomes permanent.

"The timing of this announcement, coinciding with the formal indictment of Prime Minister Netanyahu and the impeachment trial of President Trump, only underscores that it is a cynical political maneuver entirely lacking in diplomatic credibility. Coming in the midst of an Israeli election campaign, this is an attempt to hand the prime minister a political gift and a distraction from the very serious charges he is facing," J Street said.

StandWithUs offered a neutral, yet hopeful, assessment.

"As the US administration presents a new peace plan, we know that it is ultimately up to Israeli and Palestinian leaders to resolve their conflict through direct negotiations," said SWU co-founder and CEO Roz Rothstein in a statement. "We firmly respect the right of Israelis to decide what they need in any peace agreement and urge Palestinian leaders to finally engage in good faith. We hope this will be a step towards a better future for both peoples."

'A false basis that will fail'

Mideast experts also expressed mixed reactions.

"My first impression is that this plan, while in specifics far more friendly to Israel than prior ones, is still based on hopes for the Palestinians," Middle East Forum president Daniel Pipes told JNS. "This I believe to be a false basis that will fail. Only when the Palestinians give up can peace be achieved."

Israel Policy Forum policy director Michael Koplow lamented the proposal. "What Trump has destroyed is not Israeli-Palestinian peace or a two-state outcome; it is the long-held idea by many, including me, that we know what the contours of a deal will look like and only need to wait for the right leadership on both sides to have it realized," he wrote in The Forward.

"Nobody should be any under illusions that the Trump vision presented today is going to lead to a deal," he continued. "The Palestinians are hunkered down so deep in their bunker that President Mahmoud Abbas refused to take Trump's call yesterday, and the prospect of them coming to the table is closer to non-existent than it has ever been."

"Even on the Israeli side, with a proposal that is literally the most generous that Netanyahu or any Israeli prime minister could hope for, there is not a clear path forward," Koplow wrote.

Ilan Goldenberg, who served as the chief of staff to the Special Envoy for Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations at the US Department of State under the Obama administration, tweeted that the plan "might have sounded nice but it's all about the details and many of the ideas are absolute non-starters" and that it "is just deeply condescending to Palestinians and uses insensitive language all over the place. It reads as it was written by a bunch of Americans who never talked to a Palestinian about its content, which is exactly what happened."

Aaron David Miller, who advised on Mideast issues at the US State Department for 25 years and is currently a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, dismissively tweeted: "This peace plan is like so many other Trumpian ventures. He comes up with a solution to a problem we didn't have and in process makes the original problem so much worse."

This peace plan is like so many other Trumpian ventures. He comes up with a solution to a problem we didn't have and in process makes the original problem so much worse.

— Aaron David Miller (@aarondmiller2) January 28, 2020

Jonathan Schanzer, vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, tweeted: "I see now that the Israeli right endorses the plan. They back [Netanyahu]. They appear to understand that there is no way that a [Palestinian] state comes to pass under these circumstances. If true, the plan will be seen by critics as cover for [Netanyahu] and company. Will be up to Trump to make peace."

I see now that the Israeli right endorses the plan. They back Bibi. They appear to understand that there is no way that a Pal state comes to pass under these circumstances. If true, the plan will be seen by critics as cover for Bibi and company. Will be up to Trump to make peace

— Jonathan Schanzer (@JSchanzer) January 28, 2020

Eugene Kontorovich, a professor at George Mason Antonin Scalia Law School who advised the Trump administration on the initiative, said in a statement: "This plan corrects numerous fundamental failures of prior failed plans. This plan says that if the Palestinians claim they want a peaceful state, they have to meet minimum conditions, like disarming Hamas and ending pay for slay.

"The reaction of critics that such basic criteria are unrealistic shows that the idea of a peaceful state has never been the real goal," he continued. "Another difference is that in prior plans, whenever the Palestinians said 'no,' they simply locked the rejected offer as a floor for the future. The Trump plan turns that around: If the Palestinians don't come to the table, statehood gets taken off the table."

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Trump plan draws heated responses from Jewish, Israel-related groups appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

According to the report, a letter signed by 35 people who served on the J Street U board from 2013 to 2019, proposed "that J Street develop a strategy that moves the organization toward an agenda of selective aid reduction, i.e. every shekel the Israeli government spends on settlements and home demolitions results in a proportional reduction of American military aid."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

When the controversial policy was discussed internally at J Street earlier this year, according to the report, it seemed that J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami and, as a result, the board, was ready to back it. However, sources familiar with the debate told The Intercept that objections from Yael Patir, J Street's Tel Aviv-based Israel director, torpedoed it. Specifically, Patir warned that J Street would lose any influence it has left in the Knesset or Israeli politics in general if it endorsed conditioning military aid.

Patir said in response: "J Street is proud of being a broad movement encompassing a wide variety of supporters with different views and backgrounds, all of whom are committed to our mission, support for Israel and the diplomatic process. Internal discussions at J Street are conducted in a spirit of openness and attentiveness; with that, ultimately the organization has one official policy that guides us in our work in the United States and Israel."

J Street said in a statement: "We are committed to and are working for the security and prosperity of Israel and believe a diplomatic arrangement leading to the two-state solution is an American and Israeli interest alike. For this reason, we supported and continue to support the largest-ever US aid package to Israel which was signed under [former] President Obama."

The post Report: J Street sought to undermine US military aid to Israel appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Five Democratic presidential candidates addressed thousands of attendees on Sunday and Monday at the national conference of J Street, founded in 2007 as a liberal counterweight to Washington advocacy that its leaders saw as aligning US policymakers with the Israeli government exclusively enough to limit the prospects for meaningful peace with Palestinians. The candidates' attendance – in addition to videos sent to J Street by five other hopefuls who could not attend – underscores the importance of the Democratic-leaning Jewish American voting bloc.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

President Donald Trump's long embrace of Benjamin Netanyahu has helped the conservative Israeli prime minister with the battles for his political survival amid two deadlocked elections and a looming indictment threat. But the Trump-Netanyahu alliance has also strengthened J Street's case for Democrats to stand against the Israeli leader's pursuit of settlement expansion and annexation in the West Bank.

So far, at least three Democrats vying to replace Trump – Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders – have said they would consider using US aid to Israel to help press its government to take a less hawkish tack.

Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, said Monday at the conference that US support for Israel should not "turn into a go-ahead where we would be endorsing anything like annexation." He took a slightly more measured approach about whether US aid to Israel should be used to help curtail its settlement enterprise.

The prominence of the Democratic debate over how to pressure Israel marks a victory for J Street, which this week launched a push to add "formal opposition to Israel's ongoing occupation of the West Bank" to the Democratic Party's 2020 platform. Separately, the establishment liberal group Center for American Progress released recommendations Friday for a "progressive policy alternative" that includes conditions on US aid to Israel.

Yet the ascendancy of Jewish American progressive organizing under Trump isn't limited to J Street's agenda, with newer groups gaining ground to its Left, including some that focus on domestic issues. As Trump mobilizes his base by calling Jewish Democrats "disloyal" to their faith and to Israel, however, the group's core argument – that Jews can support their faith and Israel while criticizing the Israeli government – has resonated more widely, according to J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami.

Trump's polarizing effect makes it "easy to understand" that criticizing a US leader is not the same as anti-Americanism, Ben-Ami said in an interview. "The same thing goes for Israel."

Buttigieg made a nearly identical case during his Monday remarks, saying that just as "deeply patriotic" Americans can still criticize Trump, they can be "committed to the US-Israel alliance" while not signing onto every "individual policy choice by a right-wing government." Warren said the same in a video message to the conference.

Sanders, a vocal advocate for using US aid as leverage to help bring Israel-Palestinian relations closer to peace, was more direct: "It is not anti-Semitism to say that the Netanyahu government has been racist," he told the conference. After Sanders similarly derided the Israeli government earlier this year, a cabinet member in Netanyahu's party pushed back in an interview with an Israeli TV station, defending its voters' choice of conservative leadership.

Michael Koplow, policy director of the more centrist Israel Policy Forum, said that Trump's "deep unpopularity with American Jews has translated to a more critical attitude toward Israel." But he chalked that up less to a Trump-inspired impetus to criticize Netanyahu and more to the two men's closeness.

"I think people who dislike President Trump tend to project that dislike onto Netanyahu and the Israeli government," Koplow said.

But Jewish Americans, who polls show favor Democrats, are not in agreement when it comes to Trump's Israel-Palestinian policies: A Pew Research Center poll conducted in April found that 42% of them said Trump is favoring the Israelis too much and 47% said he's striking the right balance, while just 6% said he's favoring the Palestinians too much.

For all the momentum behind a Democratic discussion about conditioning US aid to Israel, the idea counts limited support from the party's left-wing in Congress, including pro-Sanders Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.). Two other presidential candidates who spoke at the J Street conference, Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), declined to endorse the option, while a third, former US Housing Secretary Julián Castro, de-emphasized it. And the political clout of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the capital's long-standing and more bipartisan vehicle to promote the US -Israel partnership, remains strong.

In addition, some Jewish American leaders who share J Street's opposition to settlement construction are not convinced that discussing contingencies on US aid alone is the best way to achieve those goals.

Rabbi Rick Jacobs, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, said in an interview that it's important to communicate that "Israel's safety and security are not mild or passing constraints." Jacobs added that he welcomes a "robust debate" on Democrats' approach to Israel that he described as in its early stages.

As that debate grows louder in the US presidential campaign, with Netanyahu's political future hanging in the balance, J Street will also continue to get its pressure from more left-leaning Jewish American groups that want to see more than rhetoric standing against Israeli policies that have undercut relations with Palestinians.

"If there is a Democratic president in (2021)," said Emily Mayer, political director of the liberal Jewish American group IfNotNow, "the question will be on the table of not only how will they reverse the damage Trump has done ... but also, how would they go beyond what Obama did?"

The post Progressive Jewish Americans and the Trump-Netanyahu embrace appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

"I would use the leverage of $3.8 billion," Sanders said, referring to the 10-year Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Israel negotiated by former President Barack Obama. "It is a lot of money, and we cannot give it carte blanche to the Israeli government, or for that matter, to any government at all. We have a right to demand respect for human rights and democracy."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The senator, who received a thunderous crowd ovation from start to finish, remarked that some of the $3.8 billion the United States annually gives to Israel in assistance should "go right now to humanitarian aid in Gaza."

The Gaza Strip has been under control by the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas since 2007, when it overthrew the Palestinian Authority. Israel has permitted international humanitarian aid transfers to the Gaza Strip, including from Arab countries such as Qatar.

"My proposal in terms of Israeli-Palestinian efforts is not a radical proposal," said Sanders. "All it says is that we need an even-hand proposal for both people. What is going on in Gaza right now, for example, is absolutely inhumane. It is unacceptable. It is unsustainable."

Sanders also attacked Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, arguing that it's not anti-Semitic to say that the government of Netanyahu has been "racist."

"It is not anti-Semitism to say that the Netanyahu government has been racist," he told the crowd at the conference. "That's a fact."

However, cautioned Sanders, "it is not only Netanyahu's government that has been a problem; let's recognize there has been corruption in terms of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority."

In response to getting endorsements from those on the record for their anti-Semitic vitriol, including Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), and comedian and law professor Amer Zahr, Sanders said, "Being Jewish may be helpful in that regard. It would be very hard for anybody to call me whose father's family was wiped out by Hitler and who spent time in Israel anti-Semitic."

Along with Sanders, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), former US Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro, South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) addressed the J Street conference.

They were all interviewed by the hosts of the weekly podcast "Pod Save the World," former National Security Council spokesperson Tommy Vietor and former US Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes to "discuss the future of the US-Israel relationship, their visions for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, their plans to combat the growing threat of white supremacy and more," according to an email from J Street ahead of the conference.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) are scheduled to address the conference on Monday night.

The conference concludes on Tuesday, when participants will lobby J Street's agenda on Capitol Hill.

The post Sanders: Part of Israel's military aid should go to Gaza 'right now' appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.