One thing Betsy Sheerr knows for sure is that most Democratic lawmakers still believe in Israel’s right to exist. She also knows that needing to reestablish this basic fact may not be a good sign for her party, and, more broadly, for American support for Israel.

“I can’t believe the bar is so low that that’s where we have to start,” said Sheerr, a longtime Democratic activist and a board member of the Jewish Democratic Council of America. 

That’s the position in which many pro-Israel Democratic advocates find themselves as they begin to take stock of the domestic political damage wrought by Israel’s two-year war with Hamas that followed the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks. 

Unlike naysayers on the right who suggest Democrats have abandoned Israel — a claim made frequently by President Donald Trump — the Jewish activists and communal leaders who advocate for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship and for U.S. aid to Israel still insist that support for the Jewish state remains bipartisan, and that congressional Democrats remain broadly pro-Israel. That proposition faced its toughest test during a two-year war, when Democrats became increasingly sympathetic to the Palestinians as Israel’s effort to eradicate Hamas left the Gaza Strip in ruins and claimed thousands of lives.

As a fragile ceasefire holds, Jewish Democrats see an opportunity to reengage party activists and elected officials who have grown frustrated with Israel’s actions in Gaza. 

Jewish Insider spoke to more than a dozen fundraisers, activists and professionals in the pro-Israel space, most with a long history of involvement in Democratic politics. Their pitch to Democrats at this precarious moment involves two parts: First, push to make Trump’s peace plan a reality. Second, ensure that Democrats understand that the value of America’s relationship with Israel is independent from the leader of either country — and that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who remains unpopular with the American left, won’t be in power forever. 

“I think ending the war turns the temperature down pretty dramatically,” said Brian Romick, CEO of Democratic Majority for Israel. “Right now, what we’re saying is, no matter where you were in the previous two years, we all need the deal to work, and so being for the deal [and] wanting the deal to work is a pro-Israel position right now, and then you build from there.”

At the start of the war, 34% of Democrats sympathized more with Israel, and 31% sympathized more with Palestinians, according to New York Times polling. New data released last month shows that 54% of Democrats now sympathize more with the Palestinians, compared to only 13% with Israel. That stark shift in public opinion corresponded to more Democratic lawmakers voting to condition American military support for Israel than ever before.

This summer, 55 Democrats in the House co-sponsored legislation that would significantly restrict arms sales to Israel. Twenty-seven Democratic senators voted in July to support a bill put forward by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) that aimed to reject Israeli arms sales. The bill failed, but it marked a watershed moment for the party, with more than half of all Democrats voting in support of the measure. Not long ago, voting to condition aid to Israel would have been seen as a red line by pro-Israel groups. But with a growing number of Democrats who have already done so, such threats could ring hollow.

“I do think that there is room to build forward,” said Jeremy Burton, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston, which works closely with Democratic lawmakers in deep-blue Massachusetts. “We have to be secure enough in our own belief in the future and our hope for the future to say ‘OK, if your point was that you’re committed to the long-term project of Israel’s security and safety, and you were looking for short term ways to pressure the government of Israel, then let’s move forward with the long-term project, even if we disagreed with you in the short term.’” 

The pro-Israel lobby AIPAC maintains that it is committed to bipartisanship on Capitol Hill, even as the group has faced sharp criticism from progressive activists — including some who have pressured political candidates to swear off donations from the group. A spokesperson for the organization downplayed the shifting political headwinds, noting that American military aid to Israel continued throughout the war. 

“It is important to separate the noise from anti-Israel extremists of the right and left and actual impact,” AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann told JI. “For example, time and time again Congress has resoundingly rejected the efforts of those extremists to cut defense assistance to Israel.”

AIPAC has a long-standing policy of not criticizing the Israeli government no matter who is in power, and that isn’t shifting. But other pro-Israel advocates believe that approach may not work with Democrats who are fed up with Netanyahu’s governance. 

“We know that can one be critical of certain Israeli government policies and still be pro-Israel, and we also know that’s increasingly the case for many Democrats, just as it is for a majority of Jewish Americans,” said Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America. 

“The vast majority of Democrats are far more sympathetic to the people of Israel than its current leadership,” echoed Tyler Gregory, who leads the Bay Area JCRC and works closely with progressive leaders in San Francisco. “We need to bring it to a human level.” 

Andrew Lachman, president of California Jewish Democrats, was more overt in his hope that Israel elects a new leader in its next election, set to take place next October, unless it’s called sooner. 

“If there’s a new change in leadership in Israel, that has the opportunity to be able to reset some of those relationships,” Lachman told JI. 

It’s a sentiment echoed by Sheerr, who regularly interacts with Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill. “I think a lot of people, both lawmakers and others, are looking forward to the next Israeli elections, frankly, and life after Bibi,” she said. That is, of course, assuming that Netanyahu isn’t reelected — a risky bet given that Netanyahu has held the role through multiple elections since 2009, except for one 18-month stretch.

Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA), who is challenging Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) in Massachusetts’ Senate primary next year, said this month that he would return donations from AIPAC, an organization that has previously endorsed him. He told JI last week that he took issue with the group’s “steadfast support for the Netanyahu government.” 

“My views on Israel as an essential partner of the United States and our most important ally in the Middle East have not changed,” Moulton said. 

Markey, for his part, has been one of Israel’s leading critics in the Senate, making next year’s Democratic primary one between a candidate who condemns the leading U.S.-Israel advocacy group and a candidate with a record of voting against military aid to Israel.

Ron Halber, who leads the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington and maintains close ties with Democratic lawmakers in Maryland and Virginia, said that Israeli leaders also have a responsibility to repair ties between Democrats and the Jewish state.

“For Israel to align itself, or for the current government or for advisors to think that working with the Republican Party is the way to the future, is about the dumbest strategic mistake I can imagine,” said Halber. “The bipartisan nature of the U.S.-Israel relationship is the fundamental blanket of Israel’s support in the world.” 

The leftward shift of Democratic lawmakers has come despite advocacy campaigns by major Jewish groups who urged senators to vote against Sanders’ resolutions restricting aid to Israel. But some within the mainstream Jewish community recognize that the longtime approach of offering unequivocal support to Israel’s government is not sustainable. 

“My opinion is that this government is harmful,” said Sam Lauter, a public affairs consultant in San Francisco and Democratic fundraiser who helped create DMFI in 2019. “I used to be one of those people who would be sort of silent about that, because ‘I’m a diaspora Jew, and I don’t get a say.’” 

Halber said he believed that many Democrats supporting Sanders’ bill “did so symbolically,” because they knew it was going to fail. “They were trying to send a message to Israel that this is a bridge too far, when they believed humanitarian aid [to Gaza] was being cut off,” he added.

The “million-dollar question,” according to Ilan Goldenberg, J Street’s vice president of policy, is whether lawmakers’ support for conditioning military assistance to Israel will continue after the war, when they have to vote to approve the annual $3.8 billion security package to Israel. 

“I think it’s going to be, ‘We need accountability, and we need certain behavior that we would like to see,’ and if you’re not getting that out of the Israelis, then a willingness to use more leverage and pressure and accountability,” said Goldenberg, who served as Jewish outreach director on Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign last year. “I think that is where the center of the Democratic Party is likely to settle, which is a very different place from where we were before the start of the war.” 

J Street has supported Sanders’ resolutions restricting arms sales to Israel.

If any of the support for the bills that sought to reject certain weapons sales carries over into the regular appropriations process, it would mark a significant shift. 

“It seems indisputable that the Overton window has shifted dramatically over the last two years in terms of what ‘the left’ broadly deems acceptable about Israel, Zionism and even the Jewish American community,” said Amanda Berman, CEO of the progressive group Zioness. “This kind of rhetoric doesn’t just disappear when the news cycle moves on. That said, the vast majority of liberals and progressives are not uniquely obsessed with Jews or Israel, and have any number of urgent issues of concern.” 

Even as pro-Israel activists seek to rebuild frayed ties with erstwhile allies, they recognize that not everyone should be welcomed back into the tent, even if the tent is bigger than it was before.

“We don’t need to be forgiving or ignoring those who chose to just demonize and be dismissive of our anxieties, our fears, our hopes over the last two years,” said Burton. 

The dust has hardly settled in Gaza, and it is too soon to know what the lasting impact of the war will be. But given that this was Israel’s longest war, and that it played out under scrutiny of the traditional media and social media, “it’s going to be a lot harder to put the genie back in the bottle than previous times,” as one person involved in Jewish philanthropy and Democratic politics quipped. 

Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter arrived at his post in January as Israel was more than a year into its war with Hamas in Gaza and facing declining American support for the Jewish state. 

The Trump administration has been much friendlier to the government in Jerusalem than its predecessor, supporting the Israeli war effort in Gaza with no limitations on arms shipments. Yet, the broader political atmosphere is more hostile to Israel than it has been in decades. 

The turn away from Israel was reflected in a recent Senate vote in which a majority of Democrats supported blocking some arms sales to Israel, as well as in the growth of the isolationist wing of the Republican Party, the rise of influential media figures who peddle antisemitism and public opinion about Israel in decline.

Leiter spoke with Jewish Insider’s Lahav Harkov and the executive director of the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, Asher Fredman, on the “Misgav Mideast Horizons” podcast this week about his efforts to engage members of both parties, the future of the U.S.-Israel alliance, what is next in the war in Gaza and more.

Amid these concerning political trends, Leiter said that the U.S. and Israel have started to discuss what will happen after the Obama-era 10-year Memorandum of Understanding between the countries, which currently commits $3.8 billion a year in American defense aid to Israel annually, expires in 2028. 

While Israel’s official position favors continuing aid, some in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Party and others on the Israeli right have been advocating for moving from a model of aid to one of collaboration on joint projects.

“Maybe we’ll change the nature [of the MOU], where there will be greater [joint] research and development between our two countries, rather than relying on American weapons,” Leiter said. 

Leiter emphasized that the defense relationship between Israel and the U.S. benefits both countries.

“Recently, there was a podcast with [Rep.] Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) in which she said, ‘Why are we giving $3.8 billion to Israel when people in the United States don’t have health care?’” he said. “What she neglected to mention is that the vast majority of the $3.8 billion is spent in the United States and actually is providing jobs — and health care — for American workers. It’s all American weapons … purchased with American aid. So it’s a win-win situation.”

Leiter also quoted Gen. George Keegan who once told journalist Wolf Blitzer that the value of Israeli intelligence is worth five CIAs.

“You know how much that would cost [to replace]? The level of cooperation we have at this point between our intelligence communities is very, very, very deep and wide. We provide a tremendous service to the United States’ interests in the Middle East,” he said.

The U.S. and Israel will have to evaluate “a paradigm shift” in the region when working on the next MOU, Leiter said.

“I think we have to start from a broader view of things in terms of the geostrategic realities that are developing in the Middle East. … The ramifications of [the strikes on Iran in] Operation Rising Lion and Midnight Hammer, but really the ramifications of the war against Iranian proxies over the past almost two years now since Oct. 7, [2023], is a changing Middle East,” Leiter said.

“We’ve seen all of the proxies degraded. We’re about to completely destroy Hamas. Hezbollah is dramatically degraded to the point where the Lebanese government is actually moving towards disarming them. We have the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. Nobody could have imagined that would have happened. And the Houthis are being degraded … There’s a new Middle East out there,” he added.

In Leiter’s view, the result of the last two years is that moderate Muslim states face fewer threats from Iran and other radical Islamists, increasing the chances of what he termed “an Abraham Accords 2.0.” 

“That enables the United States to rely more on a collective between Israel and its neighbors, and have less of an American footprint in the Middle East,” he said. 

“Therefore,” the ambassador added, “the nature of any MOU or collaborative effort is going to change.” 

Leiter spoke to JI before a day of meetings on Capitol Hill, in which he planned to meet with Democrats and Republicans. He has made sure to meet with critics of Israel in addition to friendly members of Congress.

“I will always divide my day [between the parties] and make it as much of a bipartisan effort as I possibly can,” he said. “Not only for tactical political reasons — the Democrats can take control of Congress in a year and a half and if we haven’t paid them the proper respect and attention, we’re going to pay a very serious price — but beyond the tactical political plane, I believe that Israel is a bipartisan issue and should remain so.”

Leiter said that some of Israel’s critics are reflexively critical: “It’s a very partisan atmosphere in Washington right now, which makes it very complicated. You can see this in issues that are not related to Israel … If the administration is saying one thing, the Democratic opposition believes it’s got to say something else. There’s strong support for Israel in the [Trump] administration, so that almost drives the Democratic opposition into opposing very close support for Israel.” 

The ambassador emphasized that “in the Trump administration, we’ve seen a level of collaboration between Israel and the United States that we’ve never had [before],” citing the joint strikes on Iran’s nuclear program in June. “There’s never been this kind of cooperation at this level. We’re very close on the one hand. On the other hand, there are dramatic and very intense challenges to this relationship.” 

In addition to “the woke left, which has distanced itself from Israel, because we’re perceived as … the white men that have dominated and written history,” Leiter lamented the “conspiratorial, isolationist” right.

“Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens’ orbit is not America First, it’s Israel and Jews last,” he said. “America First is fine. We don’t have an issue with that. We put Israel first, America puts America first … I think it’s obvious and elemental. With the isolationist and conspiratorial right, Israel is always wrong and the Jews are always behind everything that’s wrong.”

Still, Leiter said he has not found that anti-Israel view in the halls of the White House, State Department or Pentagon.

“There are legitimate strategic positions that the U.S. should put more focus on the far East rather than the Middle East. … I think that actually may be advantageous to Israel and the Middle East as a whole if that’s going to happen in a gradual and careful way as we move into the future,” he added.

About the ongoing war against Hamas, Leiter said, “There’s no public in the world that wants to end the war more than we [Israelis] do. No one has suffered as much as we do. Since the day Israel was founded, we haven’t experienced one day of peace. Not a day. We want to end this war and we can’t do it unless we have defeated this enemy. … The ultimate goal is going to be a complete demilitarization of Gaza,” he said.

Leiter pushed back against accusations that Israel plans to force residents out of Gaza with backing from the Trump administration.

“The president of the United States didn’t talk about forcing anybody, but talked about giving them the option … Why not allow these people the opportunity to choose? That’s all we’re suggesting.”

The ambassador noted that Israel has facilitated the exit of 40,000 people from Gaza who have visas to receive medical care in other countries, and they left through Israel, not Egypt, which would charge them tens of thousands of dollars to transit through their country.

“Why wouldn’t Egypt just open the border and let people go through?” he asked.

Leiter also spoke out against a Palestinian state, saying that very few Israelis still support the proposition.

“Even the left-of-center realize that the bandwidth for another state west of the Jordan River is untenable and unacceptable. Since Oct. 7, that bandwidth has narrowed further, and it’s about a hair’s breadth now … Everybody’s got to get used to that and stop talking about this two-state solution,” he said.

“There will be far more normalization and peaceful relations with our Palestinian neighbors once we get beyond this red herring of the two-state solution,” the ambassador added.

Leiter said that there are alternatives to a Palestinian state, including “autonomous zones … total autonomy,” while “security and overall foreign relations are going to remain in Israel’s hands.” 

He spoke about possible dramatic economic growth benefiting Palestinians in the West Bank, which could come as a result of planned infrastructure corridors crossing from the Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea.

The ambassador expressed hope about an “Abraham Accords 2.0,” in which Israel normalizes relations with Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Malaysia and several Central Asian Muslim countries.

“Once that happens, the whole issue of saying everything is based on Palestinian centrality goes away,” he said.

With a dozen countries planning to recognize a Palestinian state in the coming weeks, in an effort led by France and Saudi Arabia, Leiter accused Europe of attempting “a cleansing process, because if you can condemn Israel for genocide … that means that what Europe was guilty of 80 years ago is not unique.”

In addition, the ambassador argued that European leaders are concerned about getting the votes of growing Muslim populations in their countries.

“They couldn’t care less about Palestinians. If they really cared, they’d issue some visas. I mean, France could issue 150,000 visas and give people a new opportunity at life, but that’s the last thing they want to do. They don’t want to allow in more Muslims. …It’s a tragedy that we’re paying the price for this,” he added.

Recognizing a Palestinian state is “prolonging the war,” Leiter said. “Basically what the French are doing is declaring Oct. 7 Palestine Independence Day. Brilliant, right? Let’s reward these people for slaughter and massacre.”

“It’s an outrage. It’s immoral. And we have to stay the course. We are ultimately going to be vindicated. I have no doubt about it,” he said.

Leiter’s son, Moshe, a physician and father of six, was killed in battle in Gaza on Nov. 10, 2023.

Leiter said his son was “a very committed Jew and Zionist and he knew what he was fighting for … for the right of the Jewish people to live in their homeland in peace and security.” 

“I carry him on my back every day, and it gives me the power, the energy, the ability to go forward,” he said. “You really have to make a decision when you lose someone that you love so much and you’re so close to and fills your life with meaning and purpose. He’s the reason why it’s so hard to get up in the morning, and he’s also the reason why I do, because you have to make that choice and move forward.”