For decades, American support for Israel was a bipartisan consensus. It was believed that only fringe figures, kooks, or antisemites would question the close bond between the two nations, and that this was a relationship forged on the grounds of mutual geopolitical interests.
Well, after years of Israel conducting a mass slaughter of innocent civilians in Gaza, and after having successfully convinced President Donald Trump to launch a disastrous war in Iran, American public opinion has taken a turn. According to a Marquette Law School survey from September 2026, 59 percent of American adults have an unfavorable view of Israel, compared to only 29 percent who say they have a favorable view of the country. This is a shocking collapse from where Israel’s support was just years ago.
The policy emanating from the U.S. government, however, has not reflected this change. In fact, our political leaders and media figures have decided that now is the time to showcase their undying loyalty to Israel in a very transparent fashion.
On September 29, the Senate voted on a resolution introduced by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), that sought to force the State Department to report to Congress on the killing of U.S. citizens by Israeli settlers in the West Bank. The resolution was rejected with a 47-51 vote, with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) being the only member of the GOP to buck party lines and support the resolution.
Besides Paul, every Senate Republican – as well as Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) – voted against transparency on the issue of American citizens being killed overseas by violent settlers. What could the possible justification be for such a vote?
Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT), who voted “nay”, claims that the resolution was “another cynical ploy by Democrats to isolate our closest ally in the region.”
Not really a substantive rationale for opposing transparency on American civilians being attacked and killed abroad.
The GOP isn’t the only place where loyalty to Israel remains unshaken. Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, has again made statements that, at first glance, seem almost comically deranged.
In a recent virtual appearance at the “Pray Vote Stand Summit,” Huckabee was asked to identify the greatest threat facing Israel (as if that should be the primary concern of a U.S. official). He responded by saying that Israel’s most pressing danger does not come from a regional enemy, but from the collapse in support among the American populace.
“I think the greatest threat to Israel,” Huckabee explained, “is that they would be abandoned by those who should be their natural allies. Let me begin with the United States. We get more from Israel than we give to Israel, but most Americans don’t know it.”
“What I’m seeing happen in Europe, their turning against Israel and against the Jewish people,” Huckabee added. “This is setting up for a real challenge and a conflict not between countries, but between heaven and hell, light and darkness, truth and lies.”
“Some of the nations… have created for themselves a disastrous future by saying, yeah, we’re going to curse Israel. Well, based on Genesis 12, I don’t recommend it.”
Huckabee is implying here that by withholding support for Israel, European nations – and those who would do the same in America – have enacted a curse upon themselves and their countries. Huckabee’s position, therefore, is that we can never withdraw support for Israel, regardless of whether or not it’s in our nation’s interests. In doing so, he fears, we would be sentencing ourselves to hell.
Huckabee has articulated this stance before, so it comes as little surprise that he would make such an outlandish statement. Yet one can’t help but be startled by the fact that this man – delusions and all – is a government official.
A core source of Israeli influence is the neoconservative media. A cast of pro-Israel characters have been busy over the last few years doing damage control, attempting to reverse the draining of American support for Israel.
Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), is one of the most prominent advocates for a close U.S.-Israel relationship. He published an article in FDD on September 6 discussing the risk of Israel becoming financially isolated on the global stage. In his piece, he gave the Israeli government advice on how to prepare for such a scenario. One of his recommendations was deeply concerning:
“Israel and the United States should deepen their military, technological, intelligence and economic integration,” Dubowitz said, “to such an extent that inflicting financial harm on Israel would also carry a significant cost for Washington.”
Dubowitz went on to reiterate this message, saying in an interview later that month that Israel has “got to make the relationship deeper.”
“You’ve got to make Israel so valuable… that weaponizing that financial relationship against Israel is going to impose costs on the United States.”
At first glance, this can seem like a rather unimportant statement. After all, Dubowitz isn’t a government official, and can’t personally enact these policy proposals. However, Dubowitz is a highly-influential figure in D.C. foreign policy circles, who Trump has personally cited on his Truth Social. Here, he is using his influence to push for America to become so intertwined with Israel that leaving the relationship would inflict harm on our nation.
Something along these lines has been attempted in Congress. Earlier this year, the House of Representatives passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) in a 216-212 vote, which included a provision known as Section 219. This provision seeks to expand U.S.-Israeli military cooperation, deepening the relationship between Tel Aviv and Washington.
Backlash was swift from almost every faction of the American political scene. Tucker Carlson called the provision “grotesque,” saying “every person who votes for this is going to have to answer for it, in this life and the next.” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) struck a similar tone, urging that “we need to stand up for American sovereignty.”
Public opinion polling reflected Carlson and Khanna’s anger. A survey from Data for Progress found that 61 percent of Americans opposed Section 219. Despite this proposal’s unpopularity with the public, it would go on to pass the vote in the House.
The disconnect between Washington and the rest of the country continues to expand. In poll after poll, the American public expresses a deep skepticism – if not outright disapproval – of the U.S.-Israel relationship. Yet as the voters slowly become more unified on this issue, those in power dig their heels in deeper. Unrelenting in their support of a foreign nation, they are now embracing the open rejection of their constituent’s wishes.
We’ve known for a long time that Washington has its own set of interests, which they consistently prioritize over ours. It is particularly unbearable, however, for Washington elites to proudly boast of putting another nation’s interests at the forefront of their policymaking. At some point, enough is enough. America must reclaim its sovereignty.
Nolan Denaro is a political analyst, writer, and host of “The Quest For Clarity” podcast, available on YouTube and Spotify. He is a columnist at Antiwar.com, and his work has been published by Responsible Statecraft, the Libertarian Institute, The Daily Caller, and the Ludwig von Mises Institute. He writes on U.S. foreign policy, economics, and current events, with a particular focus on war and imperialism. He maintains a personal Substack blog, and you can follow him on X @nolandenaro. Nolan can be reached for correspondence at nolansdenaro@icloud.com.
