At first glance, few American presidents could seem more different than Harry Truman – the humble haberdasher turned statesman – and Donald Trump, the billionaire businessman and deal maker. Yet when the history of Israel is written, they may stand side by side as two of the most consequential US leaders for the safety and security of the Jewish state.
The Jewish people’s enduring debt to Truman stems from his singular decision to recognise the nascent state of Israel just 11 minutes after its declaration of independence. It is difficult today to grasp the enormity of this act – or the political courage it required. Truman’s decision was strongly opposed by his Secretary of State, George Marshall, the military hero Winston Churchill once called the “organiser of victory” in World War II. Marshall not only opposed recognition but warned Truman that he would publicly oppose him in the 1948 election if he went ahead with it.
Today, 77 years on, Israel faces a vastly different global landscape – yet another moment of existential consequence looms. The span of time between Truman’s 1948 decision and the end of the Holocaust is roughly the same as that between October 7, 2023, and today. Once again, a US president confronts a fateful choice: whether to act decisively against a threat that imperils nearly seven million Jews and millions of other Israeli citizens. Even considering the profoundly consequential, pro-Israel steps taken during his first terms, Trump now faces a moment unlike any other American president’s – with only Richard Nixon in 1973 coming remotely close.
Like Truman, Trump faces opposition from influential voices in his own orbit. Tucker Carlson – described by Politico as “perhaps the highest-profile proponent of Trumpism” – has labelled advocates for strong US support for Israel as “warmongers” and questioned their loyalty to America. Steve Bannon, a central architect of Trump’s political rise, has echoed similar sentiments.
Truman’s relationship with the Jewish community was deeply complex. His lifelong friendship with Eddie Jacobson – his Jewish army buddy and former business partner – played a vital role in securing a meeting with Chaim Weizmann and ultimately swaying Truman’s decision to recognise Israel.
Yet Truman also harboured prejudices: he occasionally used antisemitic slurs in private and once complained to his wife that Miami was filled with “hotels, filling stations, Hebrews, and cabins”. For a time in 1948, he even refused to meet with Zionist leaders.
Trump’s relationship with the Jewish community is considerably more complex. He has had Jewish friends and advisors throughout his life, and his own grandchildren are Jewish.
Yet he has repeatedly made statements criticising Jews who did not vote for him as disloyal and aligned himself with known antisemites and refused to condemn them. These statements have rightly drawn considerable criticism from many American Jewish organisations.
Complex – and even troubling – figures can still make clear, morally consequential choices. History tends to remember those choices. It judges leaders by how they act in moments of consequence. Truman’s legacy was forged not by sentiment, but by courage and clarity in the face of fierce opposition.
President Trump now faces such a moment. Regardless of the usual Iranian obfuscations and denials, there is little question of the profound threat that the regime poses to not only Israel, but the world at large. There will never be a better opportunity to stop it. The question is not abstract one – it is immediate and profoundly moral.
Will Donald Trump be remembered as the president who stopped Iran from becoming a nuclear power and stood firmly by Israel at its hour of need – or as one who looked for partial solutions and kicked the can to the next administration?
The world is watching. History will remember.
Dan Elbaum is the former Head of North America for The Jewish Agency for Israel and Chief Advocacy Officer for the American Jewish Committee.
