(This is such a complicated subject that I fear you may get lost in my short(ish) post. If you do, just remember that it’s my fault, not yours.)

Because I don’t know what Zionism means, I have no idea if I am a Zionist. I know exactly what I think about Israel, but I don’t know if that puts me within anyone’s definition of Zionism. The term, except to those who view everything as either black or white, is too ambiguous. There are religious Zionists, there are secular Zionists, there are spiritual Zionists, and there are political Zionists. There are Zionists who believe that the Zionist mission is not fulfilled until the Third Temple is built on the Temple Mount. Their are Christian Zionists who believe that until the State of Israel completes its mission, Jesus will not return for a second visit. There are Zionists who believe that Israel should be a home for those Jews who want to (or who are forced to) come, and there are Zionists who believe that all Jews should resettle in Israel. There are Zionists who believe that Israel should be a liberal democracy, with equal rights for all who live there. There are Zionists who believe that Israel must be a Jewish state (some even say a theocratic state), where non-Jews have no role, or a role only as second class citizens or residents.

Joe Biden says he is a Zionist. But I have no idea what that means.

In fact, I think the concept of Zionism, and the use of the term, should probably be relegated to history and retired. Zionism was a crucial concept in the latter part of the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries, before the State of Israel came into existence. But since then? You be a supporter of Israel without calling yourself a Zionist. Wasn’t the premise of Zionism fulfilled when Ben-Gurion declared a state, and most of the world agreed? Yes, you may feel it is important that Israel continues to exist, grow, and prosper. But you can feel that without thinking yourself a Zionist.

And now Israel’s future is really being tested. It’s being tested as a result of a terrifying invasion from Gaza by Hamas that never would have happened but for a massive security failure.

Security failures can be devastating. Think of Pearl Harbor. If American security had been working as it should have been, the Japanese invasion would have been thwarted. Who knows what might have happened then. When the US declared war against Japan, its ally Nazi Germany declared war against us. If that had not happened, would America have still even fought the Nazis, or would the isolationists have won out and the whole of 20th century history changed?

Or think about September 11, 2001. We had a lot of intelligence about the Saudis who organized the devastating attack on the Twin Towers. Think how different the world might be today if that attack had never occurred.

Even think about young Mr. Crooks who took a shot at former President DJT. As it turns out, Trump was not seriously hurt. But obviously, he could have been killed and, were he killed, it too would have been the result of a security failure.

Yes, security failures do occur, and do have consequences. And it’s the response to a security failure that really counts. As jazz pianist Errol Garner once said (I paraphrase): Everyone now and then hits the wrong note, but if you are talented, you know what note to hit next.

In politics, it is hard to find that talent. In the case of World War II, we had no choice but to fight back, and it took over four years, but we won when both Germany and Japan agreed to unconditional surrender. In the case of the Twin Towers, the American reaction was to go to war against Iraq, a country not involved in the attack on America, on the basis of a false belief as to the intention and capabilities of Iraq’s political leader. In the case of the Hamas attack, the Netanyahu government’s response has been harsh, and its success still unproven and not looking very promising.

You walk to the side of a cliff. You wonder if you should jump. You can always turn away and get to safer ground. It is never too late to do that. Until you jump. Then, it’s too late to save yourself. You are done for. Unless you tied that bungee cord tight enough. If you did, you still have a chance. If not….you are done for.

This is where Israel is. On the cliff. We, the United States, are the bungee cord.

Back to the first question. What does it mean that Biden calls himself a Zionist and that Harris has not? I suggest that it means nothing.

I am not concerned that a Harris administration will make decisions that will harm Israel’s ability to prosper, or that will make that country less safe. (Of course, she will be coming into office, it appears, when Israel’s prosperity is under attack and its security highly compromised.)

But I am concerned about what her position will be during the three month election campaign. She has a tightrope to walk to keep all Democrats happy. And all Democrats include those young Democrats who seem to be aligning themselves with the Palestinian cause. These young Democrats, which include some Jewish Democrats, are of many minds. Some are simply anti-Israel – they believe that Israel is an illegitimate country that simply should not exist. It is a colonial outpost, it is on land that rightfully belongs to Muslims, not Jews. How can land belong to a people? Uh-oh, I guess that is one premise of Zionism.

Others will defend Israel’s right to exist, but believe that Israel’s general treatment of its Arab neighbors has been heartless and wrong from the beginning. And then, of course, there are the traditional Democrats, young and old, who support Israel in its battles with its neighbors, but who are not always comfortable with Israel’s methods.

Harris must cope with these varying positions among her party’s supporters, knowing that this is far from a simple problem, knowing that most of Israel’s neighbors have fought against its existence for the past 75 years, since the day the State of Israel came into existence. She knows that telling Israel to lighten up might work to weaken Israel beyond saving, and that refraining to tell that to Israel, might lead to never ending wars.

As to those who believe that Israel should not exist, and for whom Israel’s existence with almost 10 million citizens does not change their position, there is little that she can do, except hope that they vote for her for other reasons. As to those who think Israel is too tough, she should sympathize with them – most of us probably feel that way. But she must also try to educate them as to the dilemmas facing Israel, that ignoring the enmity of its neighbors won’t automatically lead to greater security.

I have said much of this before, I know. The changes must come from better leadership on both the Israeli and the Arab sides. How and when this changed leadership will come about we don’t know. But that should be a goal of American policy.

And let me add something. My source is Donald Trump, who says, speaking about our border with Mexico, that without a border, you don’t have a country. It’s a silly statement regarding our southern border, but it is true with regard to Israel. Israel does not have settled borders. Seeing to final borders between Israel and its neighbors should be another goal of American policy.

New leadership, established borders. Add to that continued support for Israeli security,  continuing to build strong relations with moderate Arab countries, and the education of the American public, and you have the position that the Harris campaign should take.

If she does this over the next few months, I think it might be helpful. But it would be very difficult to do it well. And there would be mistakes made along the way. But as Errol Garner says: “Everyone hits wrong notes, but if you have the talent, you know where to go next”.

Oh. Am I a Zionist? Do you know?