My assessment of Bronfman is the same as your. But why has not he done that by now, then? The detioration of Hillels is going on for a couple of decades, especially since mid-1990s. Has Bronfman failed to notice it somehow?
I don't think so. The explanation may quite different: Bronfman is not as powerful as his title and his money appear to look. You can be a brilliant general but it is foot soldiers and cavalry who carry out your strategy. And Bronfman's foot soldiers are the radicals of the '60s, graduates of leftist universities. They themselves are not particularly pro-Israel any longer. The Left never was: it subscribes to one-world, transnational view, remember?
American Jewry, as a whole, was pro-Israel for about a decade or two after the Six-day War. As in Germany, most viewed Zionism with suspicion and animosity: they thought that Zionism undermined their fight against accusations of dual loyalty. [ A prominent example is Arthur Sulzberger, the part-owner and publisher of the NYTimes since 1935. Unlike the present owners, who converted to Christianity, he was Jewish. Some people accuse him of playing down the news of the Holocaust precisely because he did not want NYTimes to be seen as being "too Jewish." He spent his lifetime speaking out against Zionism. ] Personally, I am not surprised by the liberals' abandonment of Israel. The left is transnational. If they can abandon American ideals for the leftist ones, why would they not abandon a faraway Israel?