This is the Gift Link (originally via X) I used to access Sen. Chris Van Hollen's NYT (New York Times) Op-Ed titled "The Hard Truth My Party Needs to Face" and dated 26-May-2026.
Another incredible guest, with such interesting perceptions about the possibility of a two state solution as well as other options, and also what a future democratic administration should be focusing on.
I am wondering how many other voters have received a text “from President Donald Trump”, asking a series of questions about: support for MAGA, voting history for the past 10 years, and future voting plans. Oh, and also for a one-time or repeating donation.
The question on my mind is: when do we say we support diplomacy and negotiations even with bad actors ( such as supporting JCPOA with Iranian regime whose human rights record is terrible) and when do we take a firm stance against bad behavior ( such as Israel's war in gaza) ?
The belief in diplomacy implies that we can reach a deal with Netanyahu, Likud, Israel's right wing and that we have to refrain from using terms like 'genocide', 'apartheid', etc. On the other hand, the belief in taking a firm stance essentially requires the exact opposite, describing the war as genocide and holding people accountable.
Do you think there is a way to resolve this tension ?
Senator Van Hollen's column was a beginning, but I don't see how the Senate can change its policies regarding Israel without replacing Chuck Schumer. If Israel didn't exist or somehow weren't an issue, Schumer would still be an extremely poor leader who needs to be replaced. He should have been replaced long ago, but he's still there and waiting for him to (I hope) retire after his current term is a mistake. That means two more wasted years. Personally, I don't see any reason to wait until 2027 to replace Schumer, assuming that is a possible plan.
The Democrat Party was the main force behind U.S. support for Israel.
In particular the Kennedy and Carter administrations were the decisive turning points in U.S. military support for the Israeli regime.
U.S. support for Israel has always been bipartisan, and based on the interests of the U.S. rulers, not some purported Jewish or Israeli lobby, as rightist and leftist antisemites argue.
Israel served as an enforcer around the world when the United States needed dirty work done under the table. That ranged from weapons and training for bloody right-wing dictatorships in Latin America and Africa, to helping the South African apartheid regime, suppressing independence and nationalist movements in the Middle East, or having Mossad establish the SAVAK secret police for the Shah of Iran. Israel served the United States.
In 1962, JFK broke the unofficial U.S. arms embargo by selling Israel Hawk anti-aircraft missiles. He was the first president to use the term "special relationship" regarding Israel.
The 1962 sale of the MIM-23 Hawk surface-to-air missile system was a watershed moment that ended the "Tripartite" era (where the U.S., UK, and France tried to limit arms to the region) and signaled the start of the modern U.S.-Israel military alliance.
The Hawk sale set three precedents that persist today:
1. It was the first time Israel received top-tier, sensitive U.S. military technology.
2. While not a grant (it was a credit sale), it established the U.S. as Israel's primary security guarantor.
3. Once the seal was broken with the Hawk, it became much easier for Democrat LBJ to follow up with tanks (Pattons) and combat jets (A-4 Skyhawks and F-4 Phantoms) just a few years later.
_________________
In a private meeting on December 27, 1962, at Palm Beach, Florida, Kennedy met with Israeli Foreign Minister Golda Meir, when he used the term that would define the next 60 years of diplomacy.
____________
"The United States... has a SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP with Israel in the Middle East really comparable only to what it has with Britain over a wide range of world affairs."
— John F. Kennedy to Golda Meir, Memorandum of Conversation, "Conversation with Israeli Foreign Minister Meir," December 27, 1962.
Official Publication: Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS), 1961–1963, Volume XVIII, Near East, 1962–1963, Document 121.
By explicitly comparing Israel to the United Kingdom, Kennedy was elevating Israel from a "troublesome client" to a core strategic partner.
__________________
CARTER
The second key turning point in U.S. military and economic support for Israel was the massive expansion in U.S. subsidies and military sales to Israel under the Carter administration.
Carter materially strengthened Israel more than any predecessor.
Carter began the transition of moving military aid toward "all-grant" status, meaning Israel didn't have to pay the U.S. back for the weapons it received.
When Israel faced an economic crisis in the late '70s, the Carter administration provided emergency economic support to prevent a collapse of the Israeli economy.
Carter didn't just give billions in money to Israel; he ensured Israel’s "Qualitative Military Edge" (QME), the U.S. policy of ensuring Israel has better technology than its neighbors.
F-15 and F-16 Jets: Carter’s administration delivered these advanced fighters, which became the backbone of the Israeli Air Force (IAF).
The "Matmon" Plans: Carter's administration developed multi-year procurement plans, allowng Israel to plan its long-term defense strategy with guaranteed American backing.
Carter subcontracted Israel to provide military aid to dictatorships across Latin America, from 90% of the weapons to the bloody dictator Somoza to kill 50,000 Nicaraguans, to the genocidal dictatorships in Guatemala armed by Israel, which killed over 200,000 with Israeli weapons, to the Argentine dictatorship and Pinochet. Carter fostered the alliance between Israel and Apartheid South Africa.
Then of course, the crimes of ‘Genocide' Joe Biden who sent the bombs for the Gaza genocide.
Very interesting interview. Thanks for link to Chris Van Hollen article.
Thank you, Lynn!
This is the Gift Link (originally via X) I used to access Sen. Chris Van Hollen's NYT (New York Times) Op-Ed titled "The Hard Truth My Party Needs to Face" and dated 26-May-2026.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/26/opinion/democrats-israel.html?unlocked_article_code=1.lVA.VwTX.sMi17wuz2l7Q
Thank you.
Another incredible guest, with such interesting perceptions about the possibility of a two state solution as well as other options, and also what a future democratic administration should be focusing on.
Thank you, Matt, you were a breath of foreign policy fresh air.
Thank you, Debra for having Matt on The Debrief.
I am wondering how many other voters have received a text “from President Donald Trump”, asking a series of questions about: support for MAGA, voting history for the past 10 years, and future voting plans. Oh, and also for a one-time or repeating donation.
The question on my mind is: when do we say we support diplomacy and negotiations even with bad actors ( such as supporting JCPOA with Iranian regime whose human rights record is terrible) and when do we take a firm stance against bad behavior ( such as Israel's war in gaza) ?
The belief in diplomacy implies that we can reach a deal with Netanyahu, Likud, Israel's right wing and that we have to refrain from using terms like 'genocide', 'apartheid', etc. On the other hand, the belief in taking a firm stance essentially requires the exact opposite, describing the war as genocide and holding people accountable.
Do you think there is a way to resolve this tension ?
Senator Van Hollen's column was a beginning, but I don't see how the Senate can change its policies regarding Israel without replacing Chuck Schumer. If Israel didn't exist or somehow weren't an issue, Schumer would still be an extremely poor leader who needs to be replaced. He should have been replaced long ago, but he's still there and waiting for him to (I hope) retire after his current term is a mistake. That means two more wasted years. Personally, I don't see any reason to wait until 2027 to replace Schumer, assuming that is a possible plan.
𝗛𝗜𝗦𝗧𝗢𝗥𝗬 𝗢𝗙 𝗗𝗘𝗠𝗢𝗖𝗥𝗔𝗧 𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗧𝗬 𝗦𝗨𝗣𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗜𝗦𝗥𝗔𝗘𝗟
The Democrat Party was the main force behind U.S. support for Israel.
In particular the Kennedy and Carter administrations were the decisive turning points in U.S. military support for the Israeli regime.
U.S. support for Israel has always been bipartisan, and based on the interests of the U.S. rulers, not some purported Jewish or Israeli lobby, as rightist and leftist antisemites argue.
Israel served as an enforcer around the world when the United States needed dirty work done under the table. That ranged from weapons and training for bloody right-wing dictatorships in Latin America and Africa, to helping the South African apartheid regime, suppressing independence and nationalist movements in the Middle East, or having Mossad establish the SAVAK secret police for the Shah of Iran. Israel served the United States.
In 1962, JFK broke the unofficial U.S. arms embargo by selling Israel Hawk anti-aircraft missiles. He was the first president to use the term "special relationship" regarding Israel.
The 1962 sale of the MIM-23 Hawk surface-to-air missile system was a watershed moment that ended the "Tripartite" era (where the U.S., UK, and France tried to limit arms to the region) and signaled the start of the modern U.S.-Israel military alliance.
The Hawk sale set three precedents that persist today:
1. It was the first time Israel received top-tier, sensitive U.S. military technology.
2. While not a grant (it was a credit sale), it established the U.S. as Israel's primary security guarantor.
3. Once the seal was broken with the Hawk, it became much easier for Democrat LBJ to follow up with tanks (Pattons) and combat jets (A-4 Skyhawks and F-4 Phantoms) just a few years later.
_________________
In a private meeting on December 27, 1962, at Palm Beach, Florida, Kennedy met with Israeli Foreign Minister Golda Meir, when he used the term that would define the next 60 years of diplomacy.
____________
"The United States... has a SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP with Israel in the Middle East really comparable only to what it has with Britain over a wide range of world affairs."
— John F. Kennedy to Golda Meir, Memorandum of Conversation, "Conversation with Israeli Foreign Minister Meir," December 27, 1962.
Official Publication: Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS), 1961–1963, Volume XVIII, Near East, 1962–1963, Document 121.
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v18/d121
___
By explicitly comparing Israel to the United Kingdom, Kennedy was elevating Israel from a "troublesome client" to a core strategic partner.
__________________
CARTER
The second key turning point in U.S. military and economic support for Israel was the massive expansion in U.S. subsidies and military sales to Israel under the Carter administration.
Carter materially strengthened Israel more than any predecessor.
Carter began the transition of moving military aid toward "all-grant" status, meaning Israel didn't have to pay the U.S. back for the weapons it received.
When Israel faced an economic crisis in the late '70s, the Carter administration provided emergency economic support to prevent a collapse of the Israeli economy.
Carter didn't just give billions in money to Israel; he ensured Israel’s "Qualitative Military Edge" (QME), the U.S. policy of ensuring Israel has better technology than its neighbors.
F-15 and F-16 Jets: Carter’s administration delivered these advanced fighters, which became the backbone of the Israeli Air Force (IAF).
The "Matmon" Plans: Carter's administration developed multi-year procurement plans, allowng Israel to plan its long-term defense strategy with guaranteed American backing.
Carter subcontracted Israel to provide military aid to dictatorships across Latin America, from 90% of the weapons to the bloody dictator Somoza to kill 50,000 Nicaraguans, to the genocidal dictatorships in Guatemala armed by Israel, which killed over 200,000 with Israeli weapons, to the Argentine dictatorship and Pinochet. Carter fostered the alliance between Israel and Apartheid South Africa.
Then of course, the crimes of ‘Genocide' Joe Biden who sent the bombs for the Gaza genocide.