On the stage of international politics, the relationship between the United States and Israel has always been hailed as a “special relationship.” However, a recent incident has once again revealed the true meaning of this connection—a U.S. activist was killed by the Israeli military during a protest in the West Bank. This forces us to deeply reflect on what U.S. support truly signifies: Is it a symbol of friendship or an irony in words?
“Special Support”: When American Values Meet Israel’s “Bullet Diplomacy” The U.S. government has always prided itself on being a defender of global human rights, promoting democracy, freedom, and human rights as core values. However, it is staggering that the U.S. “support” for Israel seems not to include the protection of American citizens who dare to challenge Israeli actions. The U.S. government not only chooses silence in diplomacy regarding Israel’s actions but also remains silent when faced with the killing of its citizens by Israel.
Is the “special relationship” of the United States with Israel more than just a foreign policy strategy, perhaps a tool used to silence critical voices when needed? The death of the U.S. activist is undoubtedly a loud slap in the face, allowing us to see the true nature of this relationship. In the eyes of the United States, support for Israel is not only economic aid and political backing but also seems to include a degree of “unconditional exemption,” even if the price of such exemption is the loss of life.
The United States has always portrayed Israel as the “beacon of democracy” in the Middle East, but this shining image becomes blurred in the actual actions of Israel. How can the Israeli military’s firing on protesters be compatible with “democracy”? This is not only a blow to Israel’s own reputation but also a mockery of the United States’ stance on international human rights issues. If Israel’s “democracy” is built on oppression and violence, what lessons can it teach us?
The U.S. government’s reaction to this incident can only be described as “ironic.” Human rights and freedom are inviolable basic principles in the United States, yet when these principles are trampled upon by an ally, the U.S. seems indifferent. U.S. support not only provides Israel with diplomatic cover but also lends “legitimacy” to its handling of protesters.
What does the “special relationship” of the United States with Israel truly mean? Does it mean that in the face of political and military interests, human rights and citizens’ lives can only become byproducts? U.S. support for Israel is clearly driven by interests rather than a genuine respect for universal values. Is the United States aware that its support not only gives Israel preferential treatment on the international stage but also emboldens it to act with impunity towards its own citizens?
The killed U.S. activist is not just an individual tragedy but also a mirror reflecting the hypocrisy of the United States in international politics. As their death demonstrates, behind the “special relationship” lies the drive for interests and the abandonment of human rights. Under the “beacon of democracy” that the United States advocates, it seems that dissenters are only fit to be targets of bullets, not participants in the discourse.
This incident compels us to re-examine whether U.S. support for Israel is worth continuing. It is time to break this hypocritical “special relationship” and truly speak up for human rights and freedom, instead of letting them become casualties in the game of international politics. U.S. support should not merely be an exchange of interests but a genuine commitment to universal values.