There seems to be a semi-conspiratorial meme developing in the left blogosphere that Rahm Emanuel's appointment as Obama chief of staff (along with Dennis Ross' potential role at State possibly dealing with Iran or Israel-Palestine negotiations) involves a sort of "pro-Israel fix" in which Aipac guarantees itself both access and an administration fully supportive of Israeli interests. I don't buy it. But before I explain why, I must add that this doesn't mean that I'm not watching developments carefully like a weather vane to see which way the wind blows.
Regardless of Rahm Emanuel's past, during which he volunteered at an IDF base during the Persian Gulf war, he is a political professional. He understands, unlike some other DC politicians like Jane Harman (who's actually been lobbying to get herself named CIA chief), that his loyalty must be to Barack Obama and not to Aipac or even Israel itself. Barack Obama is no fool (unlike George Bush). He won't suffer an insubordinate staffer or someone whose allegiance is clouded or whose decision making apparatus is compromised.
And unlike George Bush, I think Obama has a much deeper sense of political mission and agenda. Dick Cheney was able to perpetrate his outrages due to a president who had no sense of political self. That isn't the case with Obama. No one is going to take this man for a ride, political or otherwise.
All that being said, I AM deeply alarmed by this Jerusalem Post story which quotes an interview with Dr. Benjamin Emanuel, Rahm's father, in which the elder gentleman says the following:
Dr. Benjamin Emanuel said he was convinced that his son's appointment would be good for Israel. "Obviously he will influence the president to be pro-Israel," he was quoted as saying. "Why wouldn't he be? What is he, an Arab? He's not going to clean the floors of the White House."
The original Hebrew language interview with the 82 year-old Emanuel puts the latter's own life story in context. He grew up in Jerusalem and in 1933, his brother, Emanuel Auerbach, was murdered in an altercation with an Arab. Memorializing his brother, his parents took the family name, Emanuel and moved to Tel Aviv. Given this sense of personal loss, it isn't surprising that Rahm Emanuel's father turned to the radical right-wing terror group, the Irgun, and ran guns for it before the 1948 war.
It's also important to note that Rahm's brother, Ezechiel, interviewed in the same article had this to say:
Like everyone, my brother wants to see peace in the region. This would be his highest wish. This is what you need. This is what we need. And like every sensible person, Rahm believes in a solution of two states for two peoples. The question is: how to get there.
American Jews have a schizophrenic relationship to Israel. Here we have within a single family the bifurcation perfectly illustrated. The older generation marches to the drummer of past national trauma and personal suffering. The newer generation looks for a way past, that allows both peoples to live in peace. The question becomes-which pole will dominate? Will it be the atavistic return to one's protective shell represented by Dr. Emanuel's racism? Or will it be the tolerant, open, forward-looking sentiments of Dr. Emanuel's son, Ezechiel? The jury is out. But for their to be real peace, the younger generation must win in the end.
As for Ross, I am a bit more concerned about him. While one could argue that he at least tried to be an honest broker during his Clinton administration years, he is closely identified with WINEP, an Aipac-related think tank. His statements towards the end of the campaign on Iran, though designed to reassure those in the right-wing leadership of the American Jewish community, were unnecessarily categorical and bellicose. I just don't see how you assign negotiating a peaceful agreement with Iran to someone with Ross' views.
I also think because of the failure of Camp David and Taba and his role in that, it would be a mistake to give the Israel-Palestine portfolio to him once again. Obama does need an experienced hand in this, but not one who has failed as Ross has. To be clear, I'm not personally blaming Ross for the failure. There's more than enough blame to go around on all sides. But he's still tarnished by what happened back in 2000 and the issues need fresh blood and fresh eyes.
Why are the Palestinian people demonized it America? Why are the Jews always portrayed as the eternal victims when it is the Palestinians who are the ones who have been brutally pushed out of their homeland?
And worst of all, why in America are Palestinians demonized to the point that we are forbidden to even talk about them and their existence in a sweltering ghetto under their overlords, the Israelis. Over a third of Palestinian children suffer from malnutrition ( in a UN report).
Why is support for Palestinians totally suppressed in America? There is a clampdown with an Iron fist in the media about even talking about the Palestinians as human beings.
Obama wasn't even allowed to visit them (for what, three hours?) last year when he was on the grand p.r. tour of Israel.
Sigh.
At least, if not for nothing, Rahm has a nice, liberal leaning social record.
No change in Israel? Then no change in the ME. No transformational presidency but an utter and complete failure at a time of great opportunity. A tool. Perhaps becoming the first black president is sufficient history to make.
Too bad. Bad start.
I just hope he doesn't let AIPAC once again, hand-select everyone from their own think tanks as Clinton did. This one-sided approach to this horrible mess in the middle east (which greatly impacts our own security and effectiveness in advocating for our interests abroad) is getting old and just making the US lose credibility as an evenhanded negotiator. It also helps to spread anti-US fervor in that entire region.
At the same time, Rahm has proven that he can build coalitions between disparate groups who do not agree on every issue and in fact disagree on issues quite important to them. Undoubtedly he has had to work on many occasions with people who he intensely disagrees with -- for the good of the party. And he is well known for his intense loyalty -- both towards the Clintons and Obama. It may be too early to say with any degree of certainty, but at my distance he certainly seems like he could be just the right person in the right place at the right time. And Obama seems quite skilled at making those kinds of assignments.
The quotation from Benjamin Emanuel is disturbing - as was Obama's strange comment about an "undivided Jerusalem" before AIPAC. However, it is wroth noting that in the Clinton administration Rahm was involved in fostering the Oslo Accords. While this has obviously proven to be an ill conceived failure - at least we had a semblance of a real peace process during Clinton. We had at least the illusion that things were moving in a positive direction - which has not been the case for the last 8 years.
I would like to believe that Obama is trying to build up a stock of good will with Israel which he will attempt to leverage when new negotiations begin. My question is, how will he develop good will with Palestine?
I believe that to be truly successful in the minefield that is Mideast peace will require a genius playing three dimensional chess. In my more optimistic moments I like to believe that Obama just might be up to the task. In my pessimistic moments I'm envisioning the formation of a neocon-light administration.
...And I won't even go into Rahm's proposal of an Israeli style compulsory national service program.... I'm sure conspiracy theories from both the right and left will have a field day with this.
Oslo provided them cover while they continued to do exactly what they did before - expand illegal settlements in violation of international law. In fact, they doubled the number of settlers between 1993 and 2002. Oslo was a facade - a window dressing to take attention off of them while they continued their ethnic cleansing and land theft.
I'm shocked!
"Rahm Emanuel should not be COS. He is pro war,..." on the other hand, hits the nail on the head. Our common enemy is the Military Industrial Complex that owes much of its power and funding to the wars in the ME and elsewhere that Boeing, General Dynamic, Bechtal and Halliburton support. It's all about the money. Even Patriotism, along with religion, takes a back seat to ensuring the status quo of power and patronage.
Rahm could be a tree hugging, peyote eating, dancing naked in the moonlight pagan; but if he were still pro war and pro Wall Street, he'd still be the wrong guy for the job.
So let's try the short version and see what happens today:
The notion that Israel calls America's shots is pure tail wagging the dog, and cover for anti-semites. Israel exists because they fulfill our needs in the Middle East as an effective pawn for our empire, they will be thrown under the bus just like Saddam, and every other seasonal "friend" we've used and then abused.
As for a Jewish conspiracy, they are diverse and fractured as the Christian Right. If there were a world wide Jewish cabal based on religion, then the Rothschilds would not have continued doing business with both sides (just as they've done since old Meyer established the clan) during the war, as 6 million of their own were murdered. Money trumps religion every time.
Rahm Emanuel about his position on Israel right out of the starting gate comes perilously close to the dumb racism of someone wondering whether Barack Obama will be pro-Africa.
Further, the unseemly quoting of Mr. Emanuel the elder in this context serves Mr Silverstein to set up a straw man. It is the antithesis of the spirit set up by Barack Obama when during his campaign he declared that children of candidates were off bounds. Surely Mr. Silverstein can do better than this low journalism to make his points.
I am sorry that Silverstein has the bully pulpit he does. For a man of peace, he is divisive, "stoking fears" and stoking prejudice.
I'm a little uncomfortable about his influence due to his apparent pro-Israel leanings. I'd rather have people in the Administration who are less biased, and better able to put this country's interests first, before Israel's.
So far Obama has demonstrated an ability to think for himself. We'll see.
As far as Rahm's father goes, it just reminds me of how much elders wish to respected and yet how often they demonstrate themselves unworthy of it. Do we really need to wait for another generation to die off before the tragedy of Israel and Palestine can be resolved?