Dr. Gilbert N. Kahn
a professor of political science at Kean University in Union

What do the United States election results mean for America’s relationship with Israel? The Democratic takeover of the Senate and the House and the emergence of divided government will not change the fundamental U.S. support for the safety and survival of the State of Israel. Support in Congress, regardless of which party is in control, always is solid and virtually unbreakable. Presidents come and go, but Congress remains steadfast in its backing of Israel.

The Bush administration clearly will be reviewing its overall policy in the Middle East, beginning with the war in Iraq. The departure of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the anticipated arrival of Robert Gates at the Pentagon suggest more than a cosmetic change in war policy. Coupled with the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group’s expected recommendations, one of Washington’s most leaked high-level reports, it would be reasonable, though hardly certain, to assume that the administration would seriously consider at least a redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq beginning next year.

While such a withdrawal or redeployment will not have an immediate effect on Israel, the possibility of a civil war, an increased radicalization of a new Iraqi regime, or an Iran takeover or dominance of Iraq all give Israel much pause for concern for the future of the region.

With respect to the growing potential threat posed by Iran, there is a clear likelihood that the administration will follow the growing consensus among many of our European allies, in Congress, as well as from the Baker-Hamilton report, to begin some form of diplomatic contacts with Iran and Syria. For Israel, this opening makes some sense. And yet there remains the grotesque outrage of Tehran being courted on the public stage while it persists in its anti-Israel, anti-Semitic diatribes.

All the rhetoric from Syria suggests its willingness to talk is predicated at least in part on Israel’s withdrawal from the Golan Heights (and given Israel’s experiences withdrawing from Lebanon in 2000 and from Gaza in 2005, there is unlikely to be any further unilateral withdrawal by Israel without some form of quid pro quo).

Most significantly for Israel, the Baker-Hamilton report will recommend that the Bush administration, after six years of virtual noninvolvement, make a major effort to reenergize the Israeli-Palestinian discussions. As with Syria and Iran, that means communicating with Hamas, as well as Fatah, regardless of Israel’s resistance.All of these diplomatic initiatives, while admittedly giving the radical groups some legitimacy, appear to be a small price to pay if some peaceful resolution can be brought to the Israeli border with Gaza. One can support peace without affirming the perpetual pro-Arab canard, advanced even last week by British Prime Minister Tony Blair, that solving the Palestinian crisis is the “central issue” in de-radicalizing the Muslim world.

As a way to balance Israel’s concerns about a perceived new imbalance in U.S. policy in the region, it would be appropriate if the Bush administration, the United Nations, and human rights groups would soundly condemn the ever more blatant and disgraceful use of women and children as human shields to prevent retaliation against Palestinian radicals attacking Israel civilians. It would be curious to consider how the U.S. command in Baghdad might react if the some of the Shi’ite snipers and guerrillas used human shields to protect themselves from U.S. military responses to attacks on American GI’s.

The 110th Congress will also bring more Jewish legislators, with more political power, in leadership positions as well as in key committees and subcommittees. There will be 13 Jewish senators and 30 Jewish House members, most of whom have a very strong identification with Israel. Israel will be well spoken for in both chambers, regardless of what direction the administration’s Middle East policy will take. A new direction is bound to arouse disagreements within the pro-Israel “family,” between those who want to sustain the status quo and those who include some of Israel’s strongest supporters, who have argued for some time that the Bush administration’s laissez-faire approach toward Israel may not have been in Israel’s best interest.

According to the CNN exit poll, 85 percent of the Jewish community voted Democratic this year. To maintain and sustain this level of support in the future, Democrats will have to back policies that make these voters feel that progress has been made in extricating the U.S. from Iraq, corruption is being cleaned up in Washington, and America’s social and economic problems are being more equitably addressed.

In the final analysis, American Jews will need to feel that both Congress and the administration are dealing fairly with Israel and its future place in the Middle East.