Time to Bet on Victory?

A country is in many ways like a stock. Some countries are expected or projected to go down, in prosperity, influence, power, some countries seem on their way up. Some countries are a safe bet, solid and safe, some are more like an IPO of a startup, high risk, high reward. Of course, the comparison has its limitations, but it is useful in certain cases. For example, the case of Israel. The value of Israel from a U.S. perspective.

The U.S. and Israel — so the cliché goes — are united by values. And it’s true, but it isn’t the whole truth. They had similar values back in the 1950’s and yet, the Eisenhower administration kept Israel at a distance. When countries come together there are also interests involved. Thus, the Kennedy administration, frustrated with the leaders of Arab countries, started toying with the idea of Israel as an ally. Thus, the Johnson administration pivoted to Israel, and the Nixon administration – with Israel’s stunning 1967 victory still reverberating – made the investment a matter of coherent policy. 

Israel was an asset. Sometimes it was also a nuisance, a headache, a crying baby. But an asset nonetheless. It must be an asset to keep the ties strong, because shared values would never be enough. Not when the burden of friendship becomes heavy. 

Enter Oct. 7. An event that shook Israel to its core and sent its stock crushing. It seemed weak, helpless, unstable. It seemed like a stock whose value merits scrutiny. The U.S. – the good friend that it is – rushed to the rescue. It allocated financial aid to help Israel cope with essential expenses, it gave Israel diplomatic cover, it boosted Israel’s defense, to deter its enemies from joining the fight. The U.S. did what it needed to do to help the stock recover. 

But a question mark hovered over Israel’s future value. Is it still an enterprise worthy of American investment? And don’t get me wrong: American officials do have their sentimental affinities and a solid set of values that guide them. They weren’t going to ditch Israel at the first sign of weakness, nor were they going to ignore the many emotional anchors that tie the two countries together. And yet – and yet – they would not ignore Israel’s prospect of fortune. If Israel can’t win, they’d push to stop the war. If Israel can’t achieve its goals, they’d prefer to lower the risk of larger eruption. If Israel is likely to be even more needy than before, they’d expect its leaders to be more obedient to American demands. 

But now, suddenly, Israel seems to be winning. For the administration, that prompts confusion. It saw no point in prolonging the suffering of all parties involved. Israel – such was the logic – is going to have to accept an uneasy compromise in Gaza and Lebanon. So why waste time on a frustrating war – rather than take the diplomatic solution that the U.S. and France can offer? 

That’s the logic one applies to a losing stock. Let’s sell now, before the stock goes further down, or requires more investment with no guaranteed return. That’s no longer a reasonable logic when a stock is going up. And Israel’s stock is on the rise, at least when it comes to its potential ability to win the war. “Israel hasn’t defeated its enemies,” David French wrote in The New York Times. “But consider the ways in which Israel has improved its military position since Oct. 7.” Hamas “is largely smashed” and Hezbollah “has lost… its senior leadership and many of its rockets, missiles …” We are winning, cried PM Netanyahu from the podium of the UN General Assembly last Friday. His viewers didn’t yet know – but he did – that while he was speaking, the end of Hassan Nasrallah was getting near. 

It is risky and foolish, it is reckless, to rapidly shift from despair and gloom to exhilaration and cockiness. A war is not a game. It is risky and foolish to forget the many hurdles that await Israel as the fight continues. 

It is also risky and foolish to ignore the dramatic change that occurred in recent weeks, to keep trying to sell a stock that seems to be on the rise. Israelis must adjust their emotional state to the possibility that Israel might be winning. The Biden administration must adjust its policies to the possibility that Israel might be winning. Yes, the risk is still a risk, but suddenly, an opportunity presents itself that a wise investor should not ignore. Maybe now isn’t the time for singing the old tune about the need for diplomacy and a ceasefire. Maybe now is the time to imitate the great Abe Lincoln after Antietam and encourage a victorious general to chase the enemy, hunt it down and finish it off.

It is risky and foolish to ignore the dramatic change that has occurred in recent weeks, to keep trying to sell a stock that seems to be on the rise. The Biden administration must adjust its policies to the possibility that Israel might be winning.

Something I wrote in Hebrew

On Sunday, new Chief Rabbis were elected in Israel. Here’s what I wrote:

From the point of view of most Israelis — and of all Israelis who choose it — the question of who will be the chief rabbi is quite similar to the question of which plant will be placed in the foyer of the Ministry of Strategic Affairs. If it’s ivy, let it be ivy. If it’s wisteria, let it be wisteria. Sure – we all pay the bill. The public pays for the plant, for the water, for the gardener, it also pays for the chief rabbi. The plant and the chief rabbi are similar in another way. Both don’t affect your life, unless you really insist that you want it to affect your life.

A week’s numbers

JPPI’s October survey identifies a significant jump in the level of confidence Israeli Jews have in Israel’s ability to win the war. A corresponding increase was recorded this month in the level of trust in the IDF High Command. And all this, when the poll was conducted even before Nasrallah was targeted and killed. 

A reader’s response

Here’s a response to all my readers: Have a good year, of health, prosperity and peace. Shanah Tovah.