I was planning to write this week’s column about Graham Platner and Abdul El-Sayed when Lindsey Graham died. But the upcoming Maine and Michigan Senate races, and the incendiary and anti-Zionist candidates they have featured, will need to wait until next week. Because beyond the predictable speculation over Graham’s successor and the legislative ramifications of his absence, a much more important story regarding the safety and security of Israel and the future of the Middle East has emerged in his wake.
Just a day after Graham’s death, the respected website Axios reported the ardently Zionist senator had been working toward an agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia to normalize relationships between the countries. Speculation regarding this possibility has circulated for years, but reporter Barak Ravid’s coverage indicates that Graham had made far more progress toward this ambitious goal than previously known. After years of work with both the Biden and Trump administrations, Ravid reported that “Graham’s plan was to begin an intensive diplomatic push after Israel’s October elections and the U.S. midterms, with the goal of reaching a deal before the new Congress was sworn in in January.”
Graham was also meeting regularly with key Israeli and Saudi diplomatic players, and he had planned trips to both countries to gauge the possibility for progress. He believed that the conclusion of the Iran war would provide a unique opportunity for this historic breakthrough, but also recognized the formidable military, diplomatic and political obstacles that still loomed.
First, of course, is the end of the current war. Ravid reported that the hawkish Graham had been urging Trump toward a quicker resolution to the conflict through a more sweeping military offensive than the administration has been willing to employ to date. Even more daunting would be the need for an agreed-upon path for the creation of a Palestinian state, given Riyadh’s ongoing insistence on this precondition. It’s likely that Graham’s strategy of waiting until after the Israeli elections was based on his belief that a new government in Jerusalem might be more willing to take such a extraordinary step in return for such a seminal prize.
The political hurdles in this country would have been considerable as well, which is why Graham had targeted a post-midterm timeline given the need for a two-thirds majority to pass such a treaty. Bipartisanship is unlikely to suddenly emerge in Washington the day after the election, but a post-campaign environment could increase the chances for success.
Whether you admired or despised the Trump-allied South Carolinian, we can hopefully agree that the untimely death of a dedicated public servant deserves to be mourned regardless of their political leanings. It is well known that Graham’s role in Washington has been a unique one, as he morphed from an opponent and harsh critic of the current president to a reliable and sometimes sycophantic ally.
Graham, like Marco Rubio and other traditional Republican globalists, decided a long time ago that the best way to influence Trump’s thinking was to flatter him, stand with him publicly and quietly guide him in their preferred directions. (Savvy international leaders like NATO’s Mark Rutte and Japan’s Sanae Takaichi employ a similar approach.) As a consistently pro-Israel and pro-Ukraine voice that often pushed back against the otherwise MAGA-ified inner circle that surrounds Trump, Graham could occasionally move the president on issues relating to the Middle East and Russia.
Trump’s critics have been scathing in their attacks on Graham and Rubio, calling them cowards, traitors and worse. But they have arguably had more success in shaping Trump’s thinking – at least on some issues – than more public opponents like Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney. In Graham’s absence, it is difficult to see another member of Congress or administration official capable of moving a possible Israel-Saudi deal to fruition.
Ending the Iran war is obviously an immense challenge. Convincing any Israeli government, regardless of its leader or makeup, to agree to a two-state solution will be even more difficult. But finding someone else with the skills, contacts and experience to forge such a momentous agreement will now be even harder.
Dan Schnur is the U.S. Politics Editor for the Jewish Journal. He teaches courses in politics, communications, and leadership at UC Berkeley, USC and Pepperdine. He hosts the monthly webinar “The Dan Schnur Political Report” for the Los Angeles World Affairs Council & Town Hall. Follow Dan’s work at www.danschnurpolitics.com
