We wonder about Sen. Chuck Schumer’s lodestar. The self-proclaimed “shomer Yisrael” did it again last week. The powerful leader of Senate Democrats blocked the passage of a bill, already passed by the House, that would have sanctioned officials of the International Criminal Court over their seeking to charge and arrest Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Netanyahu, for alleged war crimes.
We can’t forget Schumer’s deceptive scheming in securing Senate passage of the Iran Nuclear deal for then President Obama which Israel said posed an existential threat to its national security.
We also remember his notorious speech last March on the Senate floor – he was then the Majority Leader of the Senate – in which he called for Israel to hold new elections and vote Prime Minister Netanyahu out of office. He said that Israel was getting it all wrong in the war against Hamas resulting in unnecessary civilian casualties. He said that five months into the war with Hamas “it is clear that Israelis need to take stock of the situation and ask: Must we change course?” He said he lamented that “so many Israelis had lost their confidence in the vision and direction of their government.”
And as the most powerful person in American government besides President Biden, he surely realized that his words would be taken by Israel’s enemies that a rupture in U.S. relations was coming. Did he think that would be a good thing for him to safeguard for Israel?
The legislation at issue fell six votes short of the 60 needed for passage in the Senate. And the Wall Street Journal reported that Schumer rallied Democrats to oppose it. Why he did so is mystifying. Not only would it have protected Israel but also the U.S. Plainly, if the ICC could prosecute Israeli officials based on the quantum of evidence presented in the case, U.S. officials similarly subject to arbitrary prosecution.
So why did Schumer kill the bill? To be sure he prattled about imprecision in drafting. Yet he declined to offer changes during the many months the bill was lying around. We believe he was fearful of Senate progressives who would be voting in a future race for Majority Leader. He might also be looking over his shoulder for sins of progressives seeking to give him a primary in his next reelection campaign.
At all events he hardly sounds like a watchman our community would be interested in hiring again.
