"Israel has no better friend than the U.S.," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proclaimed to a joint session of Congress in 2011, "and the U.S. has no better friend than Israel." As recent events have once again confirmed, Bibi is only half-right. As the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday, Netanyahu's government not only worked around the White House to secure American arms during its campaign in Gaza, but deliberately undermined Secretary of State John Kerry's efforts to secure a cease-fire. As it turns out, word of this latest insult to Israel's best friend came just days after Netanyahu asked the U.S. to protect his country from potential war crimes charges before the International Criminal Court.
As the Journal explained, "White House and State Department officials who were leading U.S. efforts to rein in Israel's military campaign in the Gaza Strip were caught off guard last month when they learned that the Israeli military had been quietly securing supplies of ammunition from the Pentagon without their approval. " But even more galling are the unprecedented steps Prime Minister Netanyahu took to blow up the American effort to halt the carnage in Gaza:

While the military-to-military relationship between Israel and the U.S. was operating normally, ties on the diplomatic front were imploding. For the Americans, they worsened dramatically on July 25, when aides to Secretary of State John Kerry sent a draft of a confidential cease-fire paper to Mr. Netanyahu's advisers for feedback.
The Americans wanted the Israelis to propose changes. The U.S. didn't intend or expect the draft paper to be presented to the Israeli cabinet, but that was what Mr. Netanyahu did. U.S. officials say Mr. Netanyahu's office breached protocol by sending back no comments and presenting the paper to the cabinet for a vote.
The paper was also leaked to the Israeli media. U.S. officials say they believe the Israeli government publicly mischaracterized Mr. Kerry's ideas with the intent of buying more time to prosecute the fight against Hamas because Israeli officials were angry over outreach by Mr. Kerry to Qatar and Turkey.

Whatever the merits of Kerry's draft (which was blasted as a "betrayal" in the Israeli press), Bibi's treatment of the American Secretary of State has been appalling. The Israeli government eavesdropped on his phone calls. When Kerry was pushing a peace process not unlike that the Bush administration sought with Netanyahu's Kadima predecessor, Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon accused him of "acting out of misplaced obsession and messianic fervor." (This from a coalition government whose members largely believe God gave all of the land of Israel to the Jewish people.) Kerry was savaged for saying in private what Israeli Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert previously said in public: without a two-state agreement with the Palestinians, Israel risks becoming an "apartheid state." While conservative Knesset members call Kerry anti-Semitic, the government-funded Yesha Council of settlements produced a video mocking the Secretary for, among other things, telling Israelis to wipe their asses with a porcupine.
Kerry hasn't been the only target for Netanyahu. On the very day of Vice President Joe Biden's arrival in Israel in March 2010, Bibi announced another major expansion of settlements in the West Bank, a policy opposed by the last three American administrations. Politico described the the stark warning Vice President Biden delivered to the Israelis after their public humiliation of him:

People who heard what Biden said were stunned. "This is starting to get dangerous for us," Biden castigated his interlocutors. "What you're doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us and it endangers regional peace."
The vice president told his Israeli hosts that since many people in the Muslim world perceived a connection between Israel's actions and US policy, any decision about construction that undermines Palestinian rights in East Jerusalem could have an impact on the personal safety of American troops fighting against Islamic terrorism.

America's best friend may think a perpetual occupation of the West Bank may be vital to its national security interests, but Biden wasn't alone in making the case that U.S. interests require a different policy. As Foreign Policy detailed at the time, then-CENTCOM commander and conservative idol General David Petraeus made stressed that very point to the U.S. Joint Chiefs. Chairman Michael Mullen was apparently stunned by what he heard:

The 33-slide, 45-minute PowerPoint briefing stunned Mullen. The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM's mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, [and] that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region.

That's not all. Petraeus requested, though was later denied, the addition of the West Bank and Gaza into his theater of command. As FP reported, "Petraeus's reason was straightforward: with U.S. troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military had to be perceived by Arab leaders as engaged in the region's most troublesome conflict."
Benjamin Netanyahu delivered his insults on U.S. soil as well. Two months after that dust-up, Bibi lectured the President of the United States in front of cameras at the White House. At the United Nations and ever since, Netanyahu has demanded a "red line" ruling out an Iranian nuclear capability and has worked tireless to undermine the six-party negotiations still ongoing. While most experts believe a unilateral Israeli strike against Tehran's nuclear facilities would trigger a regional conflict almost certain to spread to American targets, the Netanyahu government has signaled it may not notify Washington in advance. And while Bibi's allies in Congress like Illinois Senator Mark Kirk stand ready to blow up the delicate nuclear talks with Iran, others like Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have offered a resolution requiring the U.S. to come to Israel's defense if it chooses to begin blowing up Iranians.
To be sure, the United States and Israel are close friends and allies. The cultural and social bonds between the American and Israeli people are, as President Obama likes to say, unbreakable. The U.S. has benefitted from the booming Israeli economy and its innovative tech sector now tightly integrated with Silicon Valley. And even when the countries have not seen eye-to-eye (as with Suez in 1956 and Secretary of State James Baker's "f**k the Jews" comment over Israeli settlements and loan guarantees), America has been with Israel in its moment of need. In June 1967, President Lyndon Johnson gave his OK to Israel's preemptive strike against Egypt and Syria, telling Foreign Minister Abba Eban, "You will whip hell out of them." And when Israel's catastrophic losses in the 1973 Yom Kippur War raised the specter of nuclear war, a massive American resupply airlift (and Defcon 3 worldwide military alert) helped stave off disaster for the Jewish State. Today, the two nations collaborate on the Iron Dome anti-missile system, close intelligence sharing and, as we recently learned, Israeli participation in the NSA's signal gathering programs throughout the Middle East.
But increasingly, Americans are asking what benefits the United States gets by being Israel's BFF. While the U.S. provides $3 billion in aid each year (aid some conservatives in both countries would like to end), Israel is near the top of the list of cyber espionage threats faced by America, as a Bush administration National Intelligence Estimate warned. Nevertheless, Netanyahu's is just the latest Israeli government to press for the release of its American spy, Jonathan Pollard, even as a condition of concessions to the Palestinians. (There's even a play about Pollard in New York right now.) And while its military assistance makes the United States complicit in Israeli policies that often run counter to American interests in the region, unlike Australia, Canada or the United Kingdom Israel's power can never be brought to bear in support of the United States. As the experience of the First Gulf War showed to the chagrin of Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, justifiable Israeli retaliation against Iraqi Scud missile strikes would have shattered the allied coalition that ejected Saddam Hussein from Kuwait.
Still, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu scolded the Obama administration again, telling Secretary Kerry and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro "not to ever second guess me again" on how to deal with Hamas. That's no way to talk to your best friend. It might be time for the United States to respond using the kind of language that Tom Friedman suggested after Netanyahu's disgraceful treatment of Biden back in 2010:

"Message from America to the Israeli government: Friends don't let friends drive drunk. And right now, you're driving drunk. You think you can embarrass your only true ally in the world, to satisfy some domestic political need, with no consequences? You have lost total contact with reality. Call us when you're serious."

(If that sounds familiar, it should. Back in the early 1990's, President George H.W. Bush's Secretary of State James Baker publicly recited the White House switchboard's phone number and declared to Israel, "When you are serious about peace, call us!")
Given the united bipartisan support for Israel in Congress, that kind of message won't be coming from the White House any time soon. But until it does, the United States will remain Israel's greatest friend, a friend without benefits.