Effective pro-Israel advocacy requires that we distinguish between legitimate criticism of Israel and criticism that is intended to delegitimize Israel. Unless we believe that Israel is the only country in the world that can do no wrong, our approach should be to develop frameworks for incorporating criticism of Israel into our pro-Israel advocacy rather than deeming all criticism of Israel per se inappropriate (or worse).

Those of us who love Israel have much to be proud of. The U.S.-Israel relationship will endure if it stems from a mature love of Israel based on the Israel that really is, wonders and faults and all; the relationship will falter if we maintain a fantasy that Israel that cannot possibly live up to.

Dana Gordon, David Goldenberg and I are hosting Sean Casten in Highland Park on August 21. Details beneath the Video Clip of the Week. Defeating Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) is one of our top priorities.

Meet Iowa congressional candidate Abby Finkenauer for lunch downtown on August 8. Abby is 29 and will lead a fresh generation of leadership in Congress. Details beneath the Video Clip of the Week. 

You're reading this. So are other influentials. If you want the right people to know about your candidate, cause, or event, reply to this email to discuss your ad.

Friends,

If you play chess, you know the feeling: Early in the game, you move a piece to a certain square. But later in the game, you're reluctant to move the piece because you know you must have had a reason for placing it there even if you can't remember the reason.

Many of us instinctively shudder at any criticism of Israel, and it's worth asking ourselves why . Once upon a time, the only people who criticized Israel were those who sought Israel's destruction and for whom the logical consequence, given their criticism of Israel, was to reduce or eliminate U.S. support for Israel. So we responded to criticism of Israel by automatically rejecting it and branding Israel's critics as anti-Israel. Indeed, much of the criticism of Israel--most infamously, Zionism is racism--was obviously wrong and clearly designed to undermine Israel's legitimacy.

We must still remain on guard against efforts to delegitimize Israel, most notably through the BDS Movement. However, we must also remind ourselves that our visceral reaction to any criticism of Israeli policies might be counterproductive. Israel is now 70 years old. Do we really believe that the Israeli government is the only government in the world that can do nothing wrong? We will lose genuine friends if we cannot distinguish between hateful criticism of Israel and policy criticism that comes from those who support a strong U.S.-Israel relationship and whose criticism does not carry with it a threat of reduced support for Israel's security or legitimacy.

Want to know how it's done? Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) recently wrote to Secretary of State Pompeo about reports of mistreatment of Palestinian children in Israeli custody. But she couched her concern about particular Israeli practices by reaffirming her "steadfast commitment to providing necessary security assistance to Israel that saves the lives of innocent civilians from terrorism and rocket attacks" and stating that "Israel is and will remain one of the United States' closest friends and allies."

Are the reports of mistreatment accurate? That's a legitimate question. The legitimate response is to find out. But when criticism of specific policies comes with a restatement of support for Israel and carries with it no threat of diminution of support for Israel, we look foolish calling the critics anti-Israel. Indeed, those who criticize certain Israeli policies from a place of friendship can more credibly advocate for Israel than those who blindly endorse any policy simply because it is the policy of the current Israeli government.

We also look foolish when we resort to whataboutism.  Asking "what about country x" is no way to defend Israel. Does country x receive military and financial assistance from the United States? Does the U.S. spend diplomatic capital defending country x at the U.N.? Does country x control sites that are holy to three major religions? Isn't part of our argument for Israel that Israel is more aligned with Western values than country x? If the answer to the first three questions is no and the answer to the last question is yes, we won't get anywhere with whataboutism.

Finally, we must understand that the choice between supporting Israel and sympathizing with the Palestinians is a false choice. There is no contradiction, not morally and certainly not practically: We cannot expect those who are concerned about the Palestinians to acknowledge Israel's legitimate concerns if we do not seek a solution that gives peace and security to both sides.

Pro-Israel advocacy in 2018 requires that we be proud of the Israel that actually is, a real country struggling with real problems and doing a remarkably good--albeit far from perfect--job in a very tough neighborhood under threats unprecedented for any democracy. Bipartisan support is essential, but in the long-run, support from people who see Israel with clear eyes, who might criticize certain Israeli policies but nevertheless support Israel, may prove more valuable than support from those who blind themselves to the reality of Israel and could face a rude awakening should their eyes be opened.

Israel is a modern-day miracle. The unbreakable bond between the U.S. and Israel must remain a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. We do ourselves and Israel a grave disservice if we fail to distinguish between honest, legitimate criticism of Israel's government and hateful criticism designed to delegitimize Israel. 

What does "pro-Israel" mean under this paradigm? It means acknowledging that the Jewish connection to the entire Land of Israel is thousands of years long and that the Jewish people have a right to a state in the Land of Israel within safe and secure borders.

It means supporting foreign aid to Israel at existing or higher levels, supporting military and intelligence cooperation between the U.S. and Israel, supporting Israel's right to self-defense, maintaining Israel's qualitative military edge, and opposing efforts by Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.

It also means opposing a one-state solution, opposing anything except at most a symbolic Palestinian "right of return" to pre-1967 Israel, and opposing attempts to delegitimize or unfairly single Israel out in international fora. This means opposing the BDS Movement not because boycotts are per se wrong, but because the goal of the BDS Movement is one state and a full "right of return" for Palestinians anywhere in Israel, which effectively means the end of Israel as a Jewish State. And if you support an Israel that is both Jewish and democratic, it means supporting a two-state solution.

One can criticize specific policies of the government of Israel or disagree with positions taken by the government of Israel and still be pro-Israel as long as one operates within this framework. Pro-Israel is not synonymous with pro-Bibi. 

We need to pull people into the pro-Israel tent, not push them away. It's hard to imagine a better example of how not to advocate for Israel than disinviting a candidate guaranteed to win election to Congress from a visit to the Shoah Museum. Sometimes we are our own worst enemies. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez should have been welcomed with open arms. She has freely admitted that she has not focused on Israel issues, and this could have been a golden opportunity to build bridges.

Dan Shapiro and Stuart Eizenstat explain that we must differentiate between criticism of Israel on security vs. non-security matters (settlements fall in the latter category). Shapiro and Eizenstat write that because "our commitment to Israel is unshakeable," it is essential that our voices be heard now.

Did you miss last week's newsletter? Here it is.

Tweet of the Week . From popular rock band Jimmy Eat World.

Video Clip of the Week. Erran Morad interviews Roy Moore.

Meet Sean Casten on August 21. Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) is anti-choice (even in cases of rape and incest), terrible on environmental issues, terrible on gun safety, and against same-sex marriage. In his recent debate with Sean Casten, Roskam refused to oppose Rod Rosenstein's impeachment. This race is getting national attention because Sean Casten has such a good chance of winning. Casten is strong on Israel, but unlike Roskam, he is also good on the other issues we care about. It's an easy choice: Roskam votes with Trump 94% of the time--we need an independent check on Trump.

Roskam is a key architect of Trump's tax giveaways to the rich; in his brilliant take-down of Roskam's illogic, Casten explains that the assumptions Roskam makes in defending his bill are like " assuming your dog is a leprechaun who can give you his gold. It makes your financial math easier, but it's completely stupid."

Dana Gordon, David Goldenberg and I are hosting Sean on Tuesday evening, August 21, in Highland Park. Please RSVP here or reply to this newsletter with your RSVP. Contributions are not required but will not be declined (especially since the House Republican PAC just announced it is reserving $2 million in TV buys for Roskam).

Meet Abby Finkenauer this Wednesday, August 8. So many great candidates! Abby is pro-Israel and is running for Congress in Iowa. She's 29 and we need her in Congress. RSVP here for lunch with her downtown, hosted by Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Richard Goldwasser, Marilyn Katz, Jim Klutznick, Eli Shearn, Steve Siegel, Ed Weil, Mae Whiteside, Mark & Margie Zivin, and Ed Weil. She's tough, and this is how Democrats will win.