|
||
Obama at AIPAC: Some Doubts Eased, Others Created
As is their wont, hard-line supporters of Israel have been pushing Barack Obama quite hard. He is, to them, an unknown commodity with questionable ties. Progressive Jewish opinion, on the other hand (and Arab Americans, as well), finds Obama appealing both because of his messages of hope and change and, specifically, because of comments he has made that indicate openness to a more nuanced discussion of Arab-Israeli peace-making. They latched on to, for example, comments he made to Jewish leaders in Cleveland on February 24th, where he appeared to reject identifying being pro-Israel with "adopting an unwaveringly pro-Likud view of Israel," and his statement to a Jewish reporter that "in order to make progress in Arab-Israeli talks...both sides should be held accountable to previous agreements."
There was, therefore, keen interest in how Barack Obama would address these concerns in his remarks before AIPAC's policy conference today. For the most part, his speech pushed all the "right" buttons. It included a personal narrative that connected his story with that of the Jewish people, including his uncle's role in the World War II liberation of a concentration camp at Buchenwald, and the larger narrative of the historic bonds between the African American and American Jewish communities based on a shared commitment to liberal values and forged in the American civil rights movement.
In addressing matters of foreign policy, the nub of the matter for AIPAC, Obama did his fair share of genuflecting and oath-taking, most of which is expected before an AIPAC audience that insists upon such displays. But, on the whole, Obama's speech was less troubling than many others delivered before AIPAC, and contrasted favorably with the AIPAC "talking point" litany delivered one hour later by Senator Clinton.
He was properly tough on Iran, but correctly took on John McCain's refusal to criticize the central role that the debacle in Iraq has played in destabilizing the Middle East while emboldening Iran and extremism. He repeatedly emphasized the need for principled diplomacy as the way to move forward. He smartly contrasted his commitment to peace-making with the neglect of the Bush administration by pledging active involvement in the search for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and Israel and Syria, and noting the responsibilities of all parties in the Middle East to contribute to that process. He specifically called on Israel to "take appropriate steps -- consistent with its security -- to ease the freedom of movement for Palestinians, improve economic conditions in the West Bank, and to refrain from building new settlements." He urged support for Palestinian President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad, and emphasized that "Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows them to prosper."
"Most Israelis and Palestinians want peace," Obama noted, "we must strengthen their hand. The United States must be a strong and consistent partner in this process -- not to force concession, but to help partners avoid stalemate and the kind of vacuums that are filled by violence."
If he had stopped there, it might have been an acceptable speech to all sides, but he went further, including a deeply troubling reference to Jerusalem which he said "will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." Left unexplained, this was both unnecessarily provocative and contradictory. If the U.S. is not to "force concessions," then why predetermine the status of Jerusalem, one of the more sensitive and complicated issues in the negotiations, in a speech to AIPAC? And if Palestinians need a state that is "contiguous," "cohesive" and "prosperous," how does that occur when one has cut the heart out of the center of the West Bank? (Note: it has been a Palestinian position that Jerusalem can "remain the capital of Israel" and can "remain undivided" as long as that does not preclude the Palestinians from also having their capital in a "shared" city.)
The AIPAC audience may have cheered, but Arabs, who called me from East Jerusalem, where they were watching the speech on TV, were deeply disheartened, as were Israeli peace activists with whom I spoke.
Better than McCain? Of course. More thoughtful than his predecessors? Clearly. But for those who have embraced Obama's "change we can believe in" slogan, a few doubts have now crept in.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Palestinian" Arabs, or any other Arabs, for that matter, have no right to claim any part of Jerusalem. It is now, and has always been, for over 3,000 years, the capital of Israel. Mohammed personally detested Jerusalem, and bade his followers to pray towards Mecca. Jews pray towards Jerusalem. Jerusalem is not even mentioned in the Koran, whereas it is mentioned over 600 times in the Torah, the Jewish Bible, and "Old Testament" to Christians.
Before the middle of the 20th century, there was absolutely ZERO interest in making Jerusalem the capital of an independent Arab state.
No part of Jerusalem will ever be divided.
BTW, both Abbas and Nasrallah insist on making ALL of Jerusalem an Arab city.
Fat chance.
Question 1: Did the groups who contolled the Palestinian half of Jerusalem allow Jews access to jewish "holy" places on theirr side, did Israelis allow Muslims access to Muslim "holy" sites before capturing all of Jerusalem? Do Israelis allow Muslims access to theur "holy" sites in all of Jerusalem today? (I really don't know the answer every one of thiese issues.)
Question 2: Do "israeli terrorists" go around the world targeting Muslim men, women, and children the way Muslim terrorists target Jewish men. women, and children?
Question 3: Israel allowed Palestinians to enter Israel to work until suicide bombers began using those entry points. Did Muslim countries ever allow Israelis in to work in their countries?
Yes, yes and yes.
OBAMA ON IRAN'S NUKE PROGRAM
At AIPAC Obama said about Iran's nuclear weapons program that he would do everything within his power to put a stop to it. The only problem is that everything has already been tried. Everything, that is short of war.
It's true every option has been tried, but look at who tried them all. Obama might have more success at a complete economic embargo of Iran.
A complete economic embargo without Russia or China? Ahmadinejad said: "Our nuclear program is unstoppable." Meaning if you want to stop it you're going to have to destroy it.
Why does obama not mention getting rid of the 200 nuclear war heads isreal has???
just as iran is a threat to the west.
sireal is a threat to the whole middle-east.
I hope Obama speech to AIPAC was only his campaign rhetoric to get elected. I hope President Obama will finally bring peace and justice in the Middle East and help the Palestinian people. Otherwise, I will be very disappointed since that was the reason why Hillary turned me off.
I've supported Obama since he declared he'd run for president..But this speech to AIPAC is troubling.
Take a look at the Obama blog on BarackObama.com, and look up the AIPAC article. Even amongst Israeli/Jewish Americans the majority are voicing a general disdain for Obama's speech to AIPAC. For all his talk of change, his speech was a typical politician's pandering-to-AIPAC rhetoric. Israeli leaders in the Knesset have spoken up against Israel's persecution go the Palestinians. Many thousands of Jews are vocally opposed to Israel's collective punishment programs and the destruction of Palestinian homes to make way for Jewish condos. Why then is this a rule that all American politicians must announce that they intend to be absolutely servile to Israel, and absolutely blind to all of its offenses?
I still don't see the Change and Hope Obama actually offers. Just saying the words means as much as putting "New and Improved" on an old bottle of detergent. A marketing slogan.
Ummmm, Ibrahimtroglodytes, cuz so many Muslim naions want to kill every man, woman, and child in Irsael??? No one wants to kill every Muslim. That's why a moral US policy is to stand alongside Israel.
A question to you: Israel has Muslim (Arab) members in its parliament, Can you name one Muslim nation which has Jews in its parliament?
Bahraini King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa has appointed a Jewish woman as envoy to Washington - the first Jew in the Arab world to become an ambassador.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1212041427530&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
You could look this up as easily as I can.
Q: "Can you name one Muslim nation which has Jews in its parliament?"
A: Yes, Iran. It's constitution mandates one seat to represent its Jewish minority. The current representative is Morris Motamed and he sits on the energy commission. He has criticized Ahmadinejad publicly. He is soon to be replaced by Siamak Mursadeq.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Motamed
IRAN.
"I still don't see the Change and Hope Obama actually offers."
Nothing... it's empty talk. Everything will remian the same. Imperial Presidency will remain the same.
PRO-ISRAELI RIGHT. ARE THE TRAITORS --- WHO PUSHED AMERICAN INTO THE WAR WITH IRAQ --- BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT IT WOULD HELP ISRAEL --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- They are the people now trying to push us into war with Iran and then Syria --- because they think it would help Israel ---------------- They are the group telling America we cannot speak with Iran and Syria --- even thought the Baker/Hamilton Iraq Study group said we need to. ---------------- They supported Israel’s racist Likud party’s ugly response to Hamas’s cease fire --- after first being elected to power --- by assassinating top Hamas leaders. ---------------- It was members of this treasonous group --- like Paul Wolfowitz and Doug Feith --- who pushed for the desbanding of the Iraqi army and the de-Baathification order after Sadam fell – because they they thought it would be good for Israel --- two decisions widely considered to have cause American and --- arguably Israel --- great harm.
MANY AMERICAN JEWS--- AND MANY ISRAELIS --- THINK THE AMERICAN PRO-ISRAELI RIGHT --- IS THE MAJOR OBSTICAL TO PEACE --- BETWEEN ISRAEL AND PAESTINE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THIS IS INDICATED BY THE FOLLOWING QUOTE FROM RABBI MICHAEL LERNER ---------------- The organized Jewish community in the United States, prodded on by the Israel Lobby … has been one of the major impediments to … any peace process that cares equally for both sides..…one can question U.S. policy (e.g. in regard to the current war we are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and possibly in Iran, but we dare not question Israeli policy! ------------------ So what can we who love Israel, want to see it survive and flourish, and feel that its current path is self-destructive, actually do politically? ---- At least for the short run, we've found that lobbying Congress is a dead-end, because most of the Congressional leaders who agree with our "progressive Middle Path that is both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine" feel scared to say so publicly, and will continue to feel this way until some mainstream political candidate is willing to run for president and make this Middle Path his or her own.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FROM RABBI MICHAEL LERNER’S, “ON ZIONISM, HEALING, AND ISRAEL'S 60TH ANNIVERSARY”----------------- at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-michael-lerner/on-zionism-healing-and-is_b_100599.html
I can only hope that his I misunderstand his statement about an undivided Jerusalem as the Capitol of Israel. I really thought, up until this point, that he was going to rise above the petty politics and actually do something to bring an end to the war on terror by bringing peace to the one area that almost every expert ( the Iraq study group, the 9/11 commission, Carter, Walt and Mearsheimer, the head of the CIAs bin laden unit, Tony Blair, and on and on) indicates is a significant factor in driving anti american and and anti Israeli sentiment.
The settlements and the settlers are simply morally bankrupt. AIPAC is morally bankrupt. They support the settlments and the Apartheid that accompany them. Two of their top officials are currently charged with espionage agaisnt the US for illegally recieving classified information on Iran with the intent of using it to foment war between the US and Iran.
Obama proves day one he hasnt the backbone to solve the Palestinian issues.
Looks like they'll get another 8 year of imprisonment.
Change Change Change is just an old song.
why wasn't John Hagee at the AIPAC meeting?
thanks for this piece James. Hopefully the next American President will return to an even-handed position as "honest broker" that will really bring peace & justice to Palestinians & real security for Israel absent of the extremism that has characterized the last 7 years of the Bush/Neocon regime. The extremist expansionist Israeli agenda has, with pre-meditation I believe, intentionally pursued policies designed to make any peace process impossible, while they expand the "settlements" in violation of International Law, build the illegal "Apartheid Wall", destroy (or steal) ancient olive groves & the rest of the Palestinian economy, destroy thousands of homes, deny building permits & maintain the defacto Gaza Warsaw Ghetto. We have had an extremist regime in power in Washington & the same in Tel Aviv...........the internationally recognized capital of Israel.....Jerusalem is NOT. We must remove the extremists in both governments to realize any real progress toward a just peace for all. It should be remembered that the so-called Saudi Initiative offered full normalization & recognition of Israel by all Arab states has been on the table since 2002 with nothing but rejection from Tel Aviv.
This comment by Obama & appearance by the other candidates also shows the power of the pro-Israel lobby to subvert our domestic & foreign policy.....to demand policy for their support.......something Americans would not allow or tolerate from ANY other foreign or domestic lobby! The American people have been manipulated & lied to for far too long about the realities in Palestine.
I am a secularist Malaysian Muslim. I would like to tell Americans that Obama, up to 24 hours ago, was all the rage in my country. My country is 50% muslim, 30% buddhist, 10% hindu and 5% christian but believe me when it came to Obama we were ALL really excited about him. A biracial man with a childhood in Indonesia (next to Malaysia)- we were really excited. We saw America differently and we were so excited by his rhetoric on diplomacy and global cooperation, particularly after Bush's 8 years of war and global economic disruption. We were at the edge of our seats waiting for his inauguration.
All that goodwill has now completely disappeared the AIPAC speech.
We dont have a problem with America protecting Israel, giving cash to Israel, arming Israel. And I honestly dont give a toss for the leaders of Iran and Syria. But Obama's speech was extremely aggressive and inflammatory, the `undivided jerusalem' statement was truly shocking- some form of Palestinian sharing of Jerusalem has long been the basis of peace negotiations.
The other thing that stunned me was Obama's extraordinary level of pandering to AIPAC. He's never pandered to any other constituency, be it gays/ lesbians, blue colour workers, black people, hollywood people etc. But AIPAC seems to be on a totally different level.
Its difficult for me to express how disappointed I feel. Maybe things wont change in the occupied territories. Maybe people will continue to die.
Wow, you speak for an entire nation!
If you're this easily panicked, perhaps your support for Obama was unfounded and you'll be happier with McCain's vision for the world.
He's a politician who plans on getting elected to the Presidency despite deeply entrenched divisions within the American people.
And litmus tests are so last-century. We're trying to forge coalitions here, not divide into camps that shout at each other over walls we built between ourselves.
ahmisk --what have you done to address intolerance in your own country?
Don't worry about U.S.A.
BBC report:
"I'm becoming an alien in Malaysia, in my own country," says Dr Jacob George.
the local authorities in the ethnic Malay-Muslim dominated city of Shah Alam demolished a 107-year-old Hindu temple.
In April another 19th-Century temple was demolished in the capital Kuala Lumpur.
And just before Christmas a newly completed church of an indigenous community in Johor state was reduced to rubble, closely monitored by Islamic department officials and the police.
During our parents' time there was no problem when you hold hands in the park," says Fong Po Kuan, a non-Muslim opposition MP.
"There's a creeping Islamicisation in our society..."
A prominent lawyer, Manoharan, who has taken up issues concerning Hindu's human rights in Kuala Lumpur, was quoted as saying,' "Non-Muslims are treated as second-class citizens. They are not concerned whether you are a Malaysian; they are concerned only if you are a Malaysian Muslim”.'
When Hindus gathered courage and protested against state supported religious terrorism and discrimination, on November 26 in Kuala Lumpur, they were crushed brutally by the Malay police using chemicals in the water cannons.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4965580.stm
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Intolerant_Malaysia_tolerant_faith/articleshow/2577230.cms
I thought Muslims had Mecca. Why do they need Jerusalem too?
samguy - Its not that Muslims need Mecca - its that Jerusalem is also a Palestinian city, conquered by Israel in its war on its neighbors in 1967. An illegal gain of territory that must be rolled back. If the Israelis want to make Jerusalem their capital, so be it - but only 'West' Jerusalem. East Jerusalem - al Quds - must be the capital of the Palestinian state.
Jerusalem is a religious sanctuary for Christianity, Judaism, and Muslim. For Muslim, Jerusalem which was the original qibla (direction of prayer) before it was changed to Mecca. Jerusalem is a Holy City and as such should not belong to any faction.
I don't think we have much to worry about. Mr. Obama is running for president within the context of misinformation and slurs re; his patriotism and especially his relationship to the Jewish population. He must veer somewhat sharply in this direction so as to compensate (I only wish Obama's mother had been Jewish; it would have made this issue an non-issue).
When in office, Obama will summon all his skill, judgement and fairness to strike notes and muscle for justice in that region. So much progress must occur under the radar.
Re: "...will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided."
I can only assume that he misspoke (yes I know he was reading from a script) or that it is purely for local political consumption since this is one of the more sensitive/major points for the final settlement. I say this since his advisers must know that Israel in many forums are psychologically accepting of the fact that Jerusalem will be at the very least a shared capital. I believe that the Barak/Arafat meetings with Bill Clinton that came so close to an agreement had some form of division negotiated.
Thus I think it's a moot point and one in anycase that is not for an American President to decide on. He is merely positioning himself visavis McSame on the Israel question (war mongering vs. negotiated settlement).
I really don't think you have much to worry about.
When a Hamas representative all but endorses your candidate, the writing is clearly on the wall.
This was nothing more than a political speech, designed to pull in a few votes. Israel knows what to expect when Obama is elected, and I suspect they're quite nervous, indeed. The enemies of Israel have a candidate, and they know it.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
