As the story is usually told, U.S. Jews feel increasingly distant from the Jewish state because of Benjamin Netanyahu, or the settlements, or the failures of the “peace process.” This supposedly contrasts with the good old days when American Jews looked with admiration on their Israeli brethren. But this analysis, writes Amnon Lord, paints an entirely deceptive picture:

For many people in Israel, ties with American Jewry are a very personal matter. We met those same Jews years ago when they were young. They—and we—aren’t young anymore. Back then, a thousand years ago on the kibbutz, they were volunteers and students of Hebrew who got up early to harvest melons. Or to work in the cowshed. They learned to love the landscape, the fields, the pool, and the dining hall. There was virtually no argument about Israel in and of itself. . . .

Today . . . a considerable number of the volunteers from the late 1960s and early 1970s are furious with Israel. Back then, they experienced the country for themselves. They saw what a country looked like after a war. Today, they are experiencing Israel via infusions from the left-leaning media. . . . Some of the Jews we used to know have developed a knee-jerk anti-Israel reaction. All the existential threats to the country don’t bother them. . . .

[Since the 1970s], many American Jews have suffered a moral collapse, and based on what they read in the New York Times, they think the Jewish state has no right to defend itself because even if its existence is legal, it is no longer legitimate.

What is interesting is that the more complicated Israel becomes, the less it is understood by American Jewry. . . . American Jews were comfortable with the homogeneous, idealistic image of Israel. . . . Now that Israel has a much stronger presence diplomatically, economically, and in the media, it’s hard for them to accept. Independent policy and even opposition to the American president, such as existed in the time of President Barack Obama, has led to a crisis among the Jews. Under Richard Nixon, when Israel butted heads with the administration about Soviet Jewry, there were no political difficulties for the Jews; they were part of the Democratic opposition, Under President Obama, when Netanyahu was unafraid of conflict, the Jews—who were part of the Democratic coalition—were in trouble. The prime minister wasn’t counting on them as a base of support for his policies against Iran.

On Wednesday, Elliott Abrams testified before Congress about the Taylor Force Act, passed in 2018 to withhold U.S. funds from the Palestinian Authority (PA) so long as it continues to reward terrorists and their families with cash. Abrams cites several factors explaining the sharp increase in Palestinian terrorism this year, among them Iran’s attempt to wage proxy war on Israel; another is the “Palestinian Authority’s continuing refusal to fight terrorism.” (Video is available at the link below.)

As long as the “pay for slay” system continues, the message to Palestinians is that terrorists should be honored and rewarded. And indeed year after year, the PA honors individuals who have committed acts of terror by naming plazas or schools after them or announcing what heroes they are or were.

There are clear alternatives to “pay to slay.” It would be reasonable for the PA to say that, whatever the crime committed, the criminal’s family and children should not suffer for it. The PA could have implemented a welfare-based system, a system of family allowances based on the number of children—as one example. It has steadfastly refused to do so, precisely because such a system would no longer honor and reward terrorists based on the seriousness of their crimes.

These efforts, like the act itself, are not at all meant to diminish assistance to the Palestinian people. Rather, they are efforts to direct aid to the Palestinian people rather than to convicted terrorists. . . . [T]he Taylor Force Act does not stop U.S. assistance to Palestinians, but keeps it out of hands in the PA that are channels for paying rewards for terror.

[S]hould the United States continue to aid the Palestinian security forces? My answer is yes, and I note that it is also the answer of Israel and Jordan. As I’ve noted, PA efforts against Hamas or other groups may be self-interested—fights among rivals, not principled fights against terrorism. Yet they can have the same effect of lessening the Iranian-backed terrorism committed by Palestinian groups that Iran supports.