Sneak Peek: Tal Becker on whether new divides are becoming irreparable

Summary

Call Me Back – with Dan Senor

Episode: Sneak Peek: Tal Becker on whether new divides are becoming irreparable
Date: July 11, 2026
Host: Dan Senor (A)
Guest: Tal Becker (B) – Senior Fellow at the Hartman Institute, ARC Media Contributor

---

Episode Overview

This members-only “Inside Call Me Back” episode dives into the evolving divides facing both Israelis and Jews globally, focusing on the shifting relationship between Israel and the United States, challenges to regional alliances in the Middle East, and the deepening rifts within the Jewish diaspora. Dan Senor and Tal Becker respond to listener questions with candor and insight, exploring not only policy dynamics but also underlying cultural and identity factors shaping today’s debates.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The US-Israel Relationship in Crisis

• Rahm Emanuel’s visit and speech at Tel Aviv University sparks a broader discussion on the recent tensions in the US-Israel relationship.
• Becker unpacks the sources of friction:
  • Differences between foreign policy disputes, government personalities (Netanyahu), and symbolic opposition that transcends specific Israeli actions ([01:58]).
  • “One of the things that's most troubling for me, Dan, is that it's almost like Israel has become a symbol rather than a real thing. ... Your position on Israel or on AIPAC or these issues is not up to debate in certain circles anymore. It's just what gets you into the conversation.” – Tal Becker ([03:34])
• Social media’s role: The repetition of talking points transforms opinions into “self-evident truths,” stifling genuine debate.
  • “He said the repeated becomes familiar, the familiar becomes credible, the credible becomes self evident, and the self evident no longer becomes questioned. ... Like, for example, on shared values or shared interests. Like some of the accusations against Israel, which there's obviously room for criticism and debate, but these things are not self evident.” – Tal Becker ([04:27])
• Becker’s call to action: Focus efforts on the areas of the US-Israel relationship where meaningful dialogue and progress are still possible, and try to marginalize those who reduce Israel to mere symbolism.

2. Israel as a Cultural, Not Just Foreign Policy, Issue

• Senor’s perspective: The debate around Israel in US politics goes far beyond geopolitics—it’s become visceral and cultural.
  • Compares Israel’s status to that of the Iraq War for Democrats in the early 2000s: a “litmus test” for party identity.
  • “Israel is the only foreign policy issue that is debated in terms that are not really about the way you think about other foreign policy issues. It's a deeply cultural issue. How else do you explain, for instance, what happened on US College campuses for the better part of the last three years?” – Dan Senor ([06:06])
  • Raises the paradox: Unlike Iraq, there is no major direct American involvement or sacrifice in Gaza, yet passions run unexpectedly high ([07:05]).

3. Listener Q&A

A. Is an Arab-Israeli Alliance Dead? (Aaron from Kfar Saba)

• Concern: Has the chance for a broader Arab-Israeli alliance vanished, with Palestinian statehood as a roadblock?
• Becker’s nuanced answer:
  • The regional order is still in flux; too soon to declare the alliance “dead” ([08:26]).
  • Active, if discreet, cooperation continues with Arab states “above the radar and below the radar.”
  • “Every one of those states is thinking how they navigate the Iranian challenge ... Israel is a potential partner in dealing with that challenge.” – Tal Becker ([08:56])
  • Persistence of regional defense and intelligence ties; room for “positive momentum” provided prudent decisions are made by regional actors ([09:45]).

B. The Diaspora Divide (Libby from Denver)

• Concern: Are divisions among Diaspora Jews being overlooked, and what are the implications if they become irreparable?
• (Addressed briefly; episode cuts off as this is a teaser, with a prompt to subscribe for the full discussion.)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Israel as a lightning rod in Western discourse:
  “[Israel] has become a symbol rather than a real thing. ... It's the entrance into the door. Your position on Israel or on AIPAC or these issues is not up to debate in certain circles anymore. It's just what gets you into the conversation.”
  — Tal Becker, [03:34]

• On the effect of social media repetition:
  “The repeated becomes familiar, the familiar becomes credible, the credible becomes self evident, and the self evident no longer becomes questioned.”
  — Tal Becker quoting a KGB tactic, [04:27]

• On Israel as a cultural issue in US politics:
  “Israel is the only foreign policy issue that is debated in terms that are not really about the way you think about other foreign policy issues. It's a deeply cultural issue.”
  — Dan Senor, [06:06]

• On regional alliances:
  “There’s alliances above the radar and below the radar. ... The thought that we don't have still good connections and partnerships with some of the states in the region I think is a mistake as well.”
  — Tal Becker, [09:00]

---

Important Timestamps

| MM:SS | Segment/Topic | |--------|---------------------------------------------------| | 01:18 | Tal Becker joins the discussion | | 01:58 | Unpacking US-Israel relationship dynamics | | 03:34 | Israel’s symbolic role in politics | | 04:27 | Social media and making issues “self-evident” | | 05:31 | US debate: Foreign policy vs. cultural issue | | 06:06 | Israel as a cultural litmus test | | 08:26 | Arab-Israeli alliance: Dead or alive? | | 09:45 | Deepening bipartite and regional relations | | 10:04 | Diaspora Jewish divides raised |

---

Tone & Style

The conversation is analytical, earnest, and nuanced—striving to move beyond headlines and reflexive talking points. Becker in particular brings a sense of caution and humility (“it’s early days yet,” “we don’t know where the dust will settle”), while Senor pushes for clarity about the root causes of current divisions.

---

For the rest of this in-depth conversation—including the critical question on Diaspora Jewish rifts—listeners are encouraged to subscribe to the full “Inside Call Me Back” feed.

Transcript

[A]

Over the past couple of years, Call Me Back has grown into something much bigger than we ever expected, a place for clarity, context and honest conversations at a time when those things can seem hard to find. That's what ARC Media is all about, building a truly independent voice, which means no one shaping what we say or how we say it. To help support our rapidly expanding operations, we created Inside Call Me Back our members only feed. If Call Me Back has been meaningful to you and you want to be part of what we're building, I hope you'll join us. You can subscribe@arc media.org or through the link in the show Notes and to our insiders. Thank you.

[B]

You are listening to an art media podcast.

[A]

Welcome to Inside Call Me Back, our members only edition where we open the door and let you shape the conversation. Today in the hot seat, addressing your questions and personal dilemmas is ARC Media contributor Tal Becker, who is also a senior fellow at the Hartman Institute in Jerusalem and council@hanigman LLP. Tal, welcome back to the Inside.

[B]

Great to be with you again, Dan.

[A]

A lot of news obviously coming out of Israel and coming out of Washington and coming out of Tehran and coming out of Ankara. But one piece of news which interestingly seemed to be a bigger story over here than in Israel, was Rahm Emanuel's visit to Israel in speech at Tel Aviv University. I'm going to be speaking to him about the speech soon, in the next couple days. But I'm just curious. You have been thinking about how American politicians and leaders around the world are trying to explain or articulate their problems with Israel. And maybe just before we jump into these questions, maybe it'd be interesting to spend a minute on that.

[B]

I maybe should caveat by saying that I didn't study Emmanuel's speech too carefully. I think I do appreciate that he kind of engaged Israel directly, which is important. But it raises a broader question which I think Israel needs to struggle with and those who care about the US Israel relationship need to struggle with, which is when you're looking at this dynamic and the different positions of different people, especially to some extent on the Democratic side, also on the Republican side, about how they think about the US Israel relationship, you kind of gotta ask how much of this is about this particular government or the personality of Netanyahu? How much of it is the way the government is speaking or the voices coming out of Israel, the loudest voices and how they've been produced some friction, how much of it is really about Israeli policy? And unless Israeli policy changes or for that matter US Policy changes, it's going to be more friction. And how much of it is the kind of Israel can do and no right can category where it really doesn't matter what Israel does. There are also, I think, bigger dynamics here, because one of the big challenges to bipartisanship at the moment, and for a long time, I guess, is it's really hard to imagine strong bipartisan relations when everything else is partisan, when everything else is fragmented. So how much of this is about opposition to Trump, which Israel is kind of collateral damage for, is another question as well. And I think maybe not this Israeli government, but the next Israeli government after the elections. There are those things that we need to think about that maybe we can't change, but there's that area which we can change, and that deserves a lot of attention. I didn't study Emmanuel's speech, as I mentioned, too much, but I would hope that also on the US Side, there's some thinking about how to move this in a different direction. One of the things that's most troubling for me, Dan, is that it's almost like Israel has become a symbol rather than a real thing. Right. It stands for something like the issue of genocide is not an issue to inquire anymore. It's the entrance into the door. Your position on Israel or on AIPEC or these issues is not up to debate in certain circles anymore. It's just what gets you into the conversation. And that, I think, is particularly troubling because there's very little you can do about it. So we need to ask, what is the area within the US Israel relationship that has room for real work and try to kind of marginalize those who have turned this into this kind of symbolic thing where it just doesn't matter what Israel says or does, doesn't matter what Israel really is kind of drawn to it. These kind of labels that you can't even argue against. One last thing I'll say I was reading this article about a memoir of a KGB official, and he was talking about KGB tactics, and he said that one of the key tactics was to repeat something a lot. And he said the repeated becomes familiar, the familiar becomes credible, the credible becomes self evident, and the self evident no longer becomes questioned. And I think one of the things that's happened in the noise of social media and how many things get repeated is almost this kind of KGB quality to things where things are repeated and so familiar they become self evident. Like, for example, on shared values or shared interests. Like some of the accusations against Israel, which there's obviously room for criticism and debate, but these things are not self evident. And I think if we're in the self evidence space where things can't be questioned and have a serious discussion, it's gonna be really difficult to engage those kind of people. But if there are people who are interested in a real conversation, where should the US Israel relationship go? Then I think there's a lot of room to work.

[A]

A few reactions. First of all, I think what is so complicated in a misleading way about the debate over Israel in US Politics right now, which I think is hard for some people to get their heads around, is that you and I tend to think when we're talking to US Policymakers about Israel and the Middle east, we tend to think about it as a foreign policy issue, as a geopolitical issue, and we talk in those terms. And what I try to get Israelis to understand Israeli policymakers and journalists in the dialogue inside the United States. It's not a foreign policy issue, it's a cultural issue.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Israel is the only foreign policy issue that is debated in terms that are not really about the way you think about other foreign policy issues. It's a deeply cultural issue. How else do you explain, for instance, what happened on US College campuses for the better part of the last three years? To me, the evidence of that, where it's so viscerally clear is and I referenced this in my conversation with Jonah Goldberg and John Pot Horace the other day, Chris Hayes, who's a prominent liberal journalist host on Ms. Now and the Cable News Network, he posted something after the primaries in New York State a little less than two weeks ago where he basically said that for Democrats now your position on Israel is the same kind of litmus test issue as it was for Democrats in terms of where they were on the Iraq war in 2003 and 2004. And the reality is the most successful Democratic politicians from that era were the ones who took a brave, quote, unquote position against the Iraq war. But it was a legitimate foreign policy issue then. I mean, we had 150, 180,000 U.S. troops in Iraq when Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were running for president. You get elected president, what are you gonna do about the fact that that there's a massive deployment of American men and women and American resources in this war? What is so perplexing about this moment, which comes back to my point about it not really being about a foreign policy issue, but being a cultural issue, is what is America actually expending in Gaza that Gaza is to Democrats today What the Iraq war was in the 2000s and the early 2000s. Which American is literally, which American is suffering because of the war in Gaza? Okay, I'm going to, I'm going to jump into these questions. Aaron from Kfar Saba, so writing in from Israel, first, I want to thank you for everything you do. While I live in Israel, I strangely find Call me back. To be the best source for understanding the bigger picture. My question is this. The idea of an Arab Israeli alliance in the Middle east, which was discussed as part of a day after plan during the first year of the war, seems to be farther away than it has ever been, if not completely disappearing in the rearview mirror. I'm worried that this would go down in history as Israel's gravest mistake during this difficult period. With a genuine path to Palestinian statehood being the barrier to this strategic outcome. Do you think it's all but dead?

[B]

Okay, so first I would say we're in a moment where the entire regional order is really in flux. So being too definitive about what's dead and not dead, I think it's being a bit too presumptuous to a certain extent. We don't know where the dust will settle on where some of the Arab states will be, and we frankly don't know what the attitude of the next Israeli government will be on the Palestinian issue. And I think it's fair to say that this strong opposition still to Palestinian statehood, but I'm not sure that we won't be able to create some positive momentum there as well. The second thing I'll say is that there's alliances above the radar and below the radar. And the thought that we don't have still good connections and partnerships with some of the states in the region I think is a mistake as well. Every one of those states is thinking how they navigate the Iranian challenge, of course, but Israel is a potential partner in dealing with that challenge, depending on how they look at the issue we offer them, I think certainly in defense, but also in some other areas, the ability to really meet this moment. And I think there is a real opportunity depending on how things develop. The last thing I'll say is that, you know, when you talk about the Arab Israel alliance and the collapse of it being evident, I don't necessarily see that Israel has a fluctuating relationship with Egypt, with Jordan, with the uae, with Bahrain, with Morocco, with a couple of other countries. There's defined defense and intelligence cooperation and there's room to grow. And every one of these countries are dealing with a region that is in major distress and changing rapidly. And I think we just need to make the best decisions in order to maximize the chances for this partnership to go forward. It's early days yet.

[A]

Okay. Libby from Denver Denver, Colorado writes, Dear Dan and the ARC team, I very much appreciate your integrity and seriousness towards covering these difficult times. There is a lot of focus on the divide, the division in Israeli society which is indeed concerning, but very little focus on the divide among Jews in the Diaspora. Why are we not talking about this more and what would it mean for Diaspora Jews and for Israel if this divide becomes irreparable? That's it for our sneak peek today. If you want to catch the full episode, please subscribe to Inside. Call me back by following the link in the description or by going to ark media.org that's ark media.org your support is what allows us to do what we do here at ARC Media. I hope to see you there.