Sen. Bernie Sanders bellowed dire predictions about the consequences of Israeli attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, warning, in no uncertain terms, of catastrophic outcomes from US involvement. He painted a picture of regional collapse, spiraling conflict, and deep damage to America’s standing in the world. As time passes and those predictions prove not only exaggerated but unfounded, a moment of reflection is in order.
For once, pro-Israel Americans owe Bernie Sanders a thank you – not for his judgment but for the clarity his errors have brought to the conversation. It should now be obvious to a broad swath of Americans that for critics of Israel like Sanders, the capacity for rational and measured judgment does not exist.
His alarmism, detachment from geopolitical nuance, and reflexive opposition to Israel have disqualified him from serious foreign policy discourse. What Sanders sees as moral clarity is, in practice, a deeply ideological rigidity that ignores both facts and outcomes.
Let’s recall how bitter Sanders’s remarks were: “Netanyahu’s reckless and illegal attacks violate international law and risk igniting a regional war. Congress must make it clear that the United States will not be dragged into Netanyahu’s war of choice.” And going further: “Netanyahu began this war with his attack on Iran. In the process, he sabotaged US-Iran negotiations on nuclear issues.”
There was nothing “reckless and illegal” about Israel’s attack on Iran, which is why Naftali Bennett, Yair Lapid, and President Isaac Herzog all supported it.
Previous remarks on Israel
This is not an isolated occurrence. Sanders has built a long record of one-sided criticisms of Israel, often refusing to condemn terrorism against Israelis with the same urgency he reserves for denouncing Israeli counterterror actions.
When Hamas fires rockets at Israeli civilian centers, Sanders calls for “restraint on both sides.” When Israel responds in self-defense, Sanders speaks of “disproportionate” force. This asymmetry betrays not just a bias but a misunderstanding of the stakes Israel faces in a region where its existence is still challenged by violent, non-state actors backed by Iran.
The hypocrisy becomes more glaring when Sanders claims to support a “Palestinian state” while undermining Israel’s right to defensible borders. His vision of peace appears to place all the responsibility on the democratic State of Israel while absolving its autocratic enemies of accountability. It’s a peace built on fantasy, not diplomacy.
Sanders is supported by J Street
Sanders does not act alone. He enjoys the backing of J Street, a group that markets itself as pro-Israel and pro-peace but has repeatedly aligned with voices critical of Israel’s security needs. J Street has a long history with Sanders. JStreetPAC endorses him on their website. Given Sanders’s long-standing critiques of Israeli policy and his association with anti-Israel extremists who have questioned Israel’s legitimacy, one is left wondering what makes JStreetPAC a “pro-Israel” organization.
Over the years, Sanders has spoken at J Street conferences and has been treated as a moral authority on Middle East policy despite his consistent record of blaming Israel first and minimizing the role of Palestinian Arab rejectionism and terrorism. His remarks have often drawn applause from those who believe Israel’s problems are primarily self-inflicted – a view far removed from the reality on the ground.
The irony is that the very Israeli actions Sanders warned would lead to catastrophe have, in fact, contributed to stability. Targeted operations against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure have set back Tehran’s ambitions and avoided full-scale conflict. The worst-case scenarios that Sanders attempted to scare Americans with have not materialized, and there is no region-wide war.
This isn’t to say there are no risks in confronting Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but it is clear that Israel’s careful, strategic actions have helped delay a nuclear-armed Tehran without plunging the region into chaos. That’s not warmongering; it’s responsible security policy.
Bernie Sanders was wrong, again. And thanks to his misjudgments, Americans have a sharper understanding of the ideological echo chamber that fuels much of today’s anti-Israel rhetoric. It’s a wake-up call – not only about Sanders but also about those who choose to follow him.
As for J Street, on July 21, it issued a press release praising Sanders for placing blame on Israel alone for violence in the West Bank and the “injustice” there.
The writer is national chairman of Americans For A Safe Israel (www.AFSI.org), a leading pro-Israel advocacy and education organization.