-4

If it is the offical foreign policy of the United States to ensure the survival of the State of Israel, both now and in the future, then should it be expected as a sign of fairness to all the other nations of the world, that the United States also commits itself to ensure the survival of all nations, both now and in the future, because all nations have the right to exist, yes?

For example, say that in 10 years from now, all the nations that border the State of South Africa suddenly decide that South Africa needs to be wiped off the face of the Earth for one reason or another. If that was to occur, then the United States should automatically obligate itself to ensure that does not happen.

Or as another example, say that in 25 years from now, all the nations that border the State of Peru suddenly decide that Peru needs to be wiped off the face of the Earth for one reason or another. If that was to occur, then the United States should automatically obligate itself to ensure that does not happen.

Since the United States is obligated to the survival of the State of Israel, does this mean that it is also obligated to save all nations?

EDIT

Citation: "...We will make sure the Jewish and democratic State of Israel can defend itself today, tomorrow, as we always have. It’s as simple as that...". - President Joe Biden, October 10, 2023

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/10/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-terrorist-attacks-in-israel-2/

8
  • 1
    Not my downvote nor VTC, but the reason could be discrediting the United States for a "specific political cause" for its obligat[ion] to the survival of the State of Israel. Furthermore, the body of the question proposes examples of whataboutisms further questioning US policy.
    – Rick Smith
    Commented May 24 at 16:06
  • @RickSmith, I see what you are saying, but I think this is more about the political theory/philosophy of the United States government rather than whataboutisms.
    – user57467
    Commented May 24 at 16:12
  • Can you provide a cite. Exactly how do you know that "saving Israel" is official US policy? Commented May 24 at 17:34
  • 1
    @GaslightDeceiveSubvert, "...We will make sure the Jewish and democratic State of Israel can defend itself today, tomorrow, as we always have. It’s as simple as that..." - President Biden, October 10, 2023. whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/10/10/…
    – user57467
    Commented May 24 at 18:30
  • Treaties, strategic allies, our (US) best interests, memberships (like NATO), etc. It isn't binary. Do you think the US shouldn't support Israel?
    – DogBoy37
    Commented May 26 at 13:30

3 Answers 3

11

No; why would it?

In more general terms, why would any obligation of country A towards country B imply that country A has that obligation to any other country? Treaties between countries (or other organisations, like the EU) are generally agreed on a case-by-case basis, precisely because one obligation has no bearing on any other.

0
5

If we speak of a moral obligation, then preventing an extermination of any nation is an obligation - even if we speak of Iran, Russia, North Korea or another sworn enemy of the US.

In practical term, there is no obligation - Alliance with Israel is a way of furthering the US interests in the Middle East, just as its alliances with some of the Arab states, like Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc. The US has also enemies in the Middle East, who would like the Yankees to go home - notably Iran and its allies.

Why the US needs the Middle East? Firstly, because of oil - even though the US is nowadays the biggest oil producer, and perhaps could cover its own needs, much of the world oil consumption is provided for by the ME, and cutting oil production or the shipping routes or simply raising oil prices could have major global consequences (like, e.g., forcing Europe to buy more oil and gas from Russia.) There are also shipping routes, e.g., like the maritime routes passing through the Suez channel - cutting the shipping (as e.g., Houthis tried to do recently) may result in product shortages or, more likely, in higher prices (aka inflation, which is a big deal before presidential elections.)

Politics is politics - the US would probably abandon Israel, if it could cut a better deal with, e.g., Iran - and the sentiment is likely reciprocal, as Israel could probably expect some favorable terms from any veto-wielding NATO member. But the probability of this happening is quite low, especially after more than half a century of successful collaboration.

5
  • the US would probably abandon Israel, if it could cut a better deal with, e.g., Iran - not with Christian Zionism, though.
    – Allure
    Commented May 31 at 3:58
  • @Allure firstly, they are likely to fall in line with whatever their party says/does, as most voters do. Secondly, these are but one interest group - there are also Muslims, and all kinds of antisemites on right and left. In the end, most Americans support Israel not because they like Jews, but because they hate Arabs even more.
    – Morisco
    Commented May 31 at 5:07
  • most Americans support Israel not because they like Jews, but because they hate Arabs even more Do you have any sources for this?
    – Allure
    Commented May 31 at 5:10
  • @Allure my personal opinion - I wouldn't put it in an answer.
    – Morisco
    Commented May 31 at 5:17
  • @Allure please don't take it as an offense to the Americans specifically - I generally don't hold high opinion of human nature.
    – Morisco
    Commented May 31 at 5:19
0

If it is the offical foreign policy of the United States to ensure the survival of the State of Israel,

The question is completely based on a opinion. Which makes clear the OPs opinion about a lot of other issues as well.

then should it be expected as a sign of fairness to all the other nations of the world, that the United States also commits itself to ensure the survival of all nations

No. Equal treatment of all the other nations of the world is not the foreign policy of any country. Or even a fair one. How about asking the same question in reverse? Since the US dropped two atom bombs on Japan should they also drop them on all other countries in the world for the sake of fairness?

For example, say that in 10 years from now, all the nations that border the State of South Africa suddenly decide that South Africa needs to be wiped off the face of the Earth for one reason or another. If that was to occur, then the United States should automatically obligate itself to ensure that does not happen

They certainly should help South Arica prevent that from happening. Unless of course the reason the countries bordering South Africa want to get rid of it is because South Africa is constantly attacking them so they perceive South Africa as a clear and present danger.

There is no need to look for and make up hypothetical examples. Look at the Russia-Ukraine war. What the US has given Ukraine to prevent that from happening dwarfs what is has given Israel for similar reasons. And unlike the situation in Israel where the US has taken plenty of responsibility for the country they are war with and given them billions of dollars , the US has not offered any humanitarian assistance whatsoever to Russian civilians affected by the war

There is no need to repeat the same question about South African and use Peru as the example so see above

2
  • 1
    "...The question starts off based on a opinion. Which makes clear the OPs opinion about a lot of other issues as well....". I'm pretty sure that President Biden has publically said on a number of occasions this year that the United States is fully committed to the survival of the State of Israel, so I'm pretty sure that it is the offical foreign policy of the U.S. to ensure the survival of Israel, so it is not really my opinion but fact.
    – user57467
    Commented May 24 at 15:20
  • 1
    Politicians like Biden talking out of both sides of their mouths do not create official foreign policy . Why don't you ask the same question about the Palestinians? Biden tells them the same thing. whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/10/20
    – Schmerel
    Commented May 24 at 15:41

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .