The US-Israel Relations: Should We Manage Disputes “Like Friends”?

Today, Monday, President Reuven Rivlin of Israel is meeting with President Joe Biden. One president is an outgoing politician, the other just began his first term. One president has no power, and very little say, the other is a commander in chief. One is the president of a small, if not insignificant country, the other is the leader of the world’s number one superpower.

In sum, this is a meeting between “friends,” but not one between equals. Rivlin is here to say goodbye, mostly to his role as the first citizen of Israel. Biden is here because that’s his job, and because he has a mission to accomplish.

Biden’s mission is to have a nuclear deal with Iran. Preferably, without seeming weak and duped and without causing uproar.

Rivlin is one tool that Biden uses to calm the waters before the stormy days of the deal. By hosting him, he proves that he is, indeed, friendly to Israel and cares about its security, that there is a way to work with Israel without a need to sweet-talk former Prime Minister Netanyahu. Of course, Rivlin was invited to the White House when Bibi was still the prime minister, and the invitation was a clear snub of him. Now, with the former PM no longer in his position the taste of the Rivlin-Biden meeting became somewhat bland. And yet, it happens. To the benefit of both.

Landing in New York, to a meeting with Jewish leaders, Rivlin said the following about Iran: “I know we may have disagreements but as always, we will manage them as friends do when they have disagreements.” This statement is also a stab at Netanyahu’s expense. He is the one who supposedly didn’t manage disagreements “as friends do.” When President Obama decided to cut a deal with Iran, Netanyahu decided to break the rules of friendship. He traveled to Washington, invited by the president’s Republican rivals, and made a speech for the ages against the agreement.

What should he have done instead? His political rivals, and many Americans observers, agree that he should have managed the disagreements “as friends do.” But if you ask Bibi about this idea, he’d probably laugh at you. Friends? If the U.S. was a friend, it wouldn’t sign such deal to begin with. Friends? What is the less friendly move—to make a speech in Congress or to make a deal with your friend’s mortal enemy?

That’s the problem with Rivlin’s suggestion to act “as a friend.” That’s the problem with similar suggestions made by Israel’s Foreign Minister Yair Lapid. Of course, Israel would like to be able to talk about Iran like friends, and coordinate with the U.S. But what the U.S. seems to want from its friend is to keep its worry under wraps and let Biden and Blinken cut a deal without making a fuss. If Israel behaves in such convivial manner, it will be entitled to call itself a friend. This would be its small reward for not raising hell over a deal that puts people in mortal danger.

Israel has two strategic goals: one is to be America’s friend, the other is to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

And yet, the question remains: what to do about Iran. What would Israel do when the deal is cut? What would it gain by being such a “friend” and by managing the disagreements behind closed doors? What would it do if behind closed doors all it gets is not much more than sympathy and a shrug? Israel has two strategic goals: one is to be America’s friend, the other is to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. The only change from Bibi to Rivlin (or Lapid), is that the former chose to risk the first (U.S.) to hopefully get the second (Iran) while the latter chooses to hopefully gain the first (U.S.) by risking the second (Iran).

Losing the U.S. as a friend would be highly problematic. Having a nuclear Iran would also be highly problematic. Promising the Americans to handle disputes like friends merely shifts the priority from problem A to problem B, without quite acknowledging that this is what happens.

Just remember that this isn’t a disagreement about manners. This is a disagreement about the most dramatic strategic challenge Israel faces.

Should the priority really be A and not B? Maybe. Maybe not. Just remember that this isn’t a disagreement about manners. This is a disagreement about the most dramatic strategic challenge Israel faces.

Shmuel Rosner is an Israeli columnist, editor, and researcher. He is the editor of the research and data-journalism website themadad.com, and is the political editor of the Jewish Journal.