Obama and Palestine

While the US presidential elections are being followed closely around the world, Palestinian appetite about the upcoming poll is insatiable. The feelings of Palestinians in the streets of Ramallah or the Gaza refugee camp is that the policies carried out by the resident of the White House will have a direct effect on their lives.

Republican nominee John McCain's foreign policy doesn't seem to be different from the current Bush administration's unilateral military action, the continuation so called war on terror and boycotting the leaders of Syria and Iran. Senator Hillary Clinton who had the courage to call for a Palestinian state during her days as the first lady has become a pro Israeli hawk ever since she ran for the senate seat for the state of New York in 2000.

Senator Barack Obama, however, is seen differently. Not that he has made any major deviation from the standard US policy towards Israel, he hasn't. But many believe that his background, candidacy, and his recent public discussion to members of the Jewish community in Cleveland Ohio, reveal a politically different kind of political candidate.

It is clear that Barack Obama personal narrative reflects a much more global candidate than the US presidential roster has ever experienced. At a time when the US world supremacy is uncontested, the world community feels shortchanged when only American issues dominate the elections of what in fact has become a global presidency. Unlike McCain's single dimensional approach to the world's 1.3 billion Muslims, Barack Obama is seen as a candidate who understands and empathizes with Muslims even while willing to militarily take on Bin Laden and his like with or without the ok of a US ally in Pakistan. Obama's willingness to go after al Qaeda without badmouthing Muslims (even as McCain and company repeatedly use the word radical Islam) reflects properly targeting America's enemy for their actions and not for the religion that they belong to.

As presented on his web site and in his talks, Obama's multilateralism is very refreshing. His call for talking with your enemies rather than boycotting them gives genuine priority to diplomacy to war, truly leaving the latter as a last resort. Ironically the Obama campaign has avoided to apply their own concept to the issue of talking to the Islamic Hamas movement in Palestine. Their argument that Hamas is a movement and not a state doesn't hold water considering that Palestinians have been yearning for a state decades and pro Hamas leaders where elected in a free and fair elections. If Obama was running for president a decade ago he surely would not have made that justification regarding talking to Mandela and the ANC (who also were not a state).

Obama supporters note that although he has refused to talk directly to Hamas, it is clear that his willingness to talk to the Syrian and Iranian leaders would provide a group like Hamas (whose leaders are supported by these countries) an opportunity to be heard, albeit, indirectly.

More specifically on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the Obama campaign has been very clear on supporting the two-state solution but has been vague on how to reach that. Ironically, Obama was the most forthcoming when speaking to 100 members of Cleveland's Jewish Community transcripts of which were published in the NY Sun on February 25, 2008.

The junior senator from Illinois was not afraid of challenging hard line American Jewish leaders even while supporting Israeli security. "This is where I get to be honest and I hope I'm not out of school here. I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel that you're anti-Israel and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel," he said. Obama listed his overall plans by stating: " My goal then would be to solicit as many practical opinions as possible in terms of how we're going to move forward on the improvement of [Palestinian-Israeli] relations and a sustainable peace.

The mixed race American candidate also said that he has consistently urged Palestinians when he was in Ramallah that they must "relinquish the right of return as it has been understood in the past. And that doesn't mean that there may not be conversations about compensation issues " Obama noted the irony that "one of the things that struck me when I went to Israel was how much more open the debate was around these issues in Israel than they are sometimes here in the United States. It's very ironic." Obama concluded by saying "I want practical, hardheaded, unromantic advice about how we're going to achieve that."

Unfortunately, however, and in response the statements of his pastor which included criticism of US support of Israeli "state sponsored terrorism against Palestinians," Obama discounted all the national struggles of Palestinians (that included secular Palestinians, moderate Muslim and Christian Palestinians) by attacking Pastor Wright's sermon as "a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam."

Despite all of that, for Palestinian clutching on the thinnest of straws to stay afloat, the Obama candidacy is for some a source of optimism. His consistent rejection of the war on Iraq and his willingness to withdraw and solve it diplomatically gives some hope that he will need to seriously deal with the Palestine issue if he wants to win the hearts and minds of Arabs and Muslims. They argue that if diplomacy will trump military in resolving the US problems in Iraq and the dispute with Iran, a practical solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict will be necessary. Contrasted with the quickly fading promises of George Bush for a peace treaty in 2008, some are pinning some hope on the possibility of an Obama presidency.

Daoud Kuttab, an award winning Palestinian journalist is a visiting lecturer at Princeton University.

Follow Daoud Kuttab on Twitter: www.twitter.com/daoudkuttab

Comments

[FreedomLoverX]

More crap. How about the Arab world opening up to the Palestinians? Do you want to tell the truth about the Palestinian history, or do you want to keep up this destroy Israel at all costs mentality?

Meanwhile, Obama has my vote - I am a Jew with relatives in Israel. The assumption that he would favor the Palestinians over the Israelis is simply a lie made up. I think he would instead try to help develop a fair solution. So far, every time Israel has made a decent offer, the "Palestinians" have found a way to mess it up.

[trevor01]

Obama is all things to all people which is to say he probably won't be much good for anyone. But good luck to you and your extended family.

[ResidentChimp]

"Palestinians have found a way to mess it up"? That implies that they were trying to make a go of it and then goofed as opposed to fighting tooth and nail to destroy Israel. If you think Obama will be even handed between Arabs and Israel, I hope your relatives have a good escape route.

[jhNY]

"Fighting tooth and nail to destroy Israel"? Yes, from the inside and for years before there was a state of Israel to destroy. Then the revolution came in 1948, and all the revolutionaries poured out of boats from overseas and liberated the land from folks who had deeds going back generations. Those ungrateful Palestinians. Instead of embracing the new deed-holders, they thought they'd rather have their property back, and became unmanageable. They have been paying for that mistake ever since. And in all likelihood will continue paying no matter which candidate wins the presidency here. So relax. Nobody in US politics has been able to criticise Israel's doings and prosper in a generation or two.

[AnneOnymous]

FreedomLover: Perhaps your comment is intended as a reply to someone else, but you make some statements that don't seem to be based on what Mr. Kuttab actually said. I see nothing about "destroying Israel at all costs" either stated directly or implied in his post., nor is there anything about "favoring Palestinians over the Israelis." The myth about the Palestinians always being the ones to mess up any possible peace deal is simply anti-Palestinian propaganda, as is the use of "Palestinian" in quotes to indicate that there is no such thing as a Palestinian, which is an untruth about Palestinian history.

[AnneOnymous]

For some reason, the second paragraph of my post got cut off. Here it is:

[BubbaC33]

The Palestinians rejected the peace proposal made during the Clinton presidency, one that would have given them everything they have demanded. They messed up peace.

[Noelle]

The fact that Senator Obama ranked dead last on the list of acceptable American Presidential candidates to the Isreali government is one of the reasons I was drawn to his candidacy. I am so sick and tired of candidates running for president in The United States of America having to get the blessing of the Israeli government before being "viable". I don't know when this started but what I do know is that every candidate from both political parties must make a trip to Israel and get "permission". Unfortunately, this is as true as ever and Senator Obama is catching on.

The fact that he caught the irony so early on that it's harder to step out of line in America than it is in Israel when dealing with Israeli policy is good to know, as is the fact he actually spoke openly about his reservations with the pro-Likud part of the Israeli community, both here and in Israel. I don't know of many candidates or Presidents for that matter that have done that in front of a Jewish crowd. Another Irony is that many of them probably agree and are as shy about speaking out as anyone else is.

Not so in Israel. The media in Israel is far more critical of the actions of their government, particularly the far-right, than the U.S. media has probably ever been. I understand what Senator Obama needs to do, what they all need to do but I'm convinced that in his heart he realizes there are two sides to this story and what I wouldn't give to have a president who actually did have real empathy for the plight of the Palestinians. Senator Obama has been great about listening to the people of this country and what they need and want, whether The Washington establishment agrees or not. I am hoping he will do the same with the Israeli people, whether or not the far-right of their government approves. Just as long as he is careful doing it and stays safe.

[jeffepops]

Mr., Kuttab, with all due respect: the vast majority of Americans, Obama included, strongly support the state of Israel -- it's unqualified right to exist as well as defend itself from terrorism.

Obama has clearly stated that Palestinian leadership has been the greatest cause of the continued suffering of the Palestinian people. I suspect that when Obama is elected President, he will make it very clear to Arab and Palestinian leadership that they must create their own new narrative and begin preaching peace and co-existence to their subjects and citizens.

As far as supporting a two-state solution -- all Presidential candidates, as well as our current President favor this solution. So does the Prime Mister of Israel, for that matter. When the "secular Palestinian" leadership begins to call for moderation and the end to rocket attacks on innocent Israelis, the possibilities for peace will open up and move forward rapidly.

I'll be voting for Obama in November, with the full confidence that he will remain a true friend to Israel and seek a peaceful resolution to the Israel/Arab conflict -- including the creation of a peaceful Palestinian state.

[FearlessFreep]

"Obama has clearly stated that Palestinian leadership has been the greatest cause of the continued suffering of the Palestinian people."
Time to blame the victims.

[BubbaC33]

My concern about Obama and the Middle East is real, I do not believe he will be fair in his relationship with Israel. The fact this "journalist" is open to Obama is a good sign I won't be voting for the senator fro Illinois.

[treadway123]

Ir's about time that we get a president who will listen to both sides of the story----------with telling both sides that to forge a new beginning ----------we have to let go of the pain, anger and resentment of the past. Both these countries should have thier say---------but for many years we've only listened to one side-------and say only one side has it right! I have jews in our family, so I see thier side. But, I also see Isreal has not been open and at times very unfair to palestine people too. So I agree------It's time to get the view of not only the leaders, but what the people themselfs feel will end this on going war. I feel Obama will listen more, because he is not Polarized like Clinton and Mccain to the PAST problems. and will bse able to look for the future solutions. Other wise he needs to have a MOTHER/FATHER out look and seattle this argument like parent would looking at both sides/and both childrens out look on things to come to a comprimise.

[BubbaC33]

Arabs have been much more unfair to those Arabs living in Israel than the Israeli government. From 1948-1967 Jordan and Egypt had the opportunity to create a "Palestinian" homeland, but failed to do so. And most "Palestinians" identified themselves as Syrians until it became more important to chaneg for propaganda purposes in 1964.

[booksnmore4you]

Obama recognizes that no one in politics gets their full plate - no one - and that extreme and unbending views of every stripe are unproductive to achieving progress. You post simply expands how that would likely play out, based upon available evidence, on the question of Israel/Palestine. Your assessment seems well done on my first read of it.

[PioneerKing]

Reality check: Sen. Obama will not win in November if he is the Democratic Party's nominee. Sen. Obama is getting bloodied by Sen. clinton's campaign and the republican's 527's will finish him off.
RALPH NADER 2008

[jeffepops]

Noted conservative scholar and former Mitt Romney adviser Douglas Kmiec just come out with a strong and eloquent endorsement of Obama. Once Obama has sewn up the nomination -- and I expect Bill Richardson's endorsement has opened the floodgates -- I think he will build up a considerable lead on McCain in a short period of time.

[andyg]

he endorsement Obama, because he dosn't like McCain.

http://tinyurl.com/yvrhwf

[tangolopez]

Uh, Nader will unite Israel and Palestine? Did you just came back from Mars?

[orbit25]

Nader's Palestine-Isreal position does have a chance of stabilizing that region. Obama should stop alienating Nader and consult with him. Obama has a lot to learn and Nader could help bring the "Change" Obama promises. Obama can't do this alone and at the moment he has too many of Bill Clinton's people as advisors.

[IndependentTogether]

Reality check: I reject your reality in favor of *true* reality.

Fact: In spite of the perceived disadvantage of being Black, the neo-conservative movement to game the Democratic elections against him, and being under constant attack from Hillary, her campaign's supporters and strategists, John McCain, a former Democratic president, the current Republican president, the GOP, the right-wing media, AND the so-called left-wing media, not to mention *you* and wishful thinkers like you, he’s managed to maintain his class and composure and appears to be bouncing back in the national polls.

Fact: To believe that John McCain will receive a free pass from now until November just because the focus is now on Obama is the height of naiveté. McCain has yet to receive the real scrutiny of the MSM. When he does, look out for age, his “senior moments”, and his bad temper that will be used against him by the 527s. Also, his expedient flip-flops on policy and alarming religious affiliations will gain major play.

Fact: If you believe that Obama has come this far while having a lack of toughness, then you suffer from cognitive dissonance.

Fact: making a prediction in March as to what will happen in November is just plain silly.

[jhNY]

Yes, by all means, vote for a guy who has no chance of winning anything than for a guy with a chance. Reality check? Yours would bounce.

[treadway123]

Where have you been. Obama has already return to his statis before the Rev. wright thing! Now that Hillary has lied--------Or has been caught in MORE lie about her first lady duties---------and with Richards turning hs back on them--------We'll it looks brighter and better than ever for Obama!

[SamSedaei - Huffpost Blogger]

Eloquently written. Thank you for your willingness to talk about an issue on which we almost always hear one side of it - America and Israel's side. I agree that the United States should talk with Hamas. Isolating them in Gaza and hoping they'd go away isn't going to work.

I look forward to reading more of your thoughts in the future.

[jeffepops]

Please elaborate on what you believe would result from the U.S. talking with Hamas.

[RabidRightRebel]

You do know this fight between the Israelis and the Palestinians could be ended quickly if Israel was willing to abide by United Nations resolutions and join NATO don’t you?

You see the resolution require Israel to return to the 1967 borders which is what the Palestinians will now except as the final solution to the matter and joining NATO will give Israel the security assistance it needs to prevent any serious attacks against it. It is only because Israel refuses to give up the occupied territories that this is not possible.

[SadButWiser]

Peace!

[jay1975]

Why should we be the ones trying to bring peace there? I hate how we pick and choose who we want to help in the world. Either we try to help everyone or we don't even think about it until we fix all of our problems here at home first. I am for the latter.

[SadButWiser]

I wish it was a simple as that. There is a lot at stake. A peaceful Middle East really means less business for the war industry. After all, the cold war is over or almost over. and the war industry needs to keep the demand for their products and services flowing. Fortunately for them, the Gulf states in the Arab world has the money and the latent need.

[UrbanInterloper]

The most direct answer to your question (why should the U.S. try to bring peace there?) is simple: because peace between Israel and Palestine would be the single-most effective thing anyone could could do to reduce the terrorist threat to the U.S. It would deprive terrorist recruiters of one of their signature issues.

[BubbaC33]

YOu could not be more wrong. Syria, Egypt, Jordan, and other Arab nations cannot be trusted to stand firm against future acts of Arab adventurism. What people on HuffPo seem to miss in all of this is simple and clear. Israel is surrounded by hostile Arab armies. Israel is surrounded by hostile Arab nations. Israel has a right to exist within defensible borders that provide the strategic depth necessary for the protection of the nation of Israel. The biggest thing posters seem to miss is this is life or death for Israel. There is no room for error. And no one in the leadership of the Israeli government should be willing to do anythig that might put the future of Israel in doubt.