Jeremy Ben Ami of J-Street who was at the meeting between Jewish leaders and President Obama, thought that the President was amazing. In an extremely soft interview Ben Ami recounts:
One is Malcolm Hoenlein’s, and he’s said this publicly, that he feels that history shows us that progress is made on the peace front when Israel and the U.S. are in lockstep and there’s no daylight between them on their position publicly. And the president said ‘With all due respect, I would disagree. For eight years under the prior administration, there was no daylight between the two sides and there was no progress on the peace front, and no hard decisions were confronted, no progress was made.’ He very politely, but very clearly, disagrees with the notion that there shouldn’t be a public space between the Israeli government’s and the U.S. government’s position. I think that’s a very important point.
And the second example would be a question of tone, where there are those in the room who would say that the president has been one-sided in his demands. And that he is only asking things of Israel, and the president really again pushed back, very calmly but firmly, and said no, that he has on every occasion, where he has spoken out publicly, and where the [U.S.] government has taken a position, made it clear that there are obligations and steps that must be taken by Israel, and obligations and steps that must be taken by Palestinians and the broader Arab community. If we’re going to make progress, both sides have to live up to commitments and both sides have to take some steps.
Except that President Obama has been very clear and specific about what he demands of Israel – plus he has reversed American policy regarding the Middle East. He has been rather general about what he asks of the Palestinians and the Arab world. And he hasn’t pushed those requests very hard either.
Martin Peretz, an Obama supporter on most other matters dissents (via memeorandum):
Frankly, I am sick and tired of President Obama’s eldering–more accurately, hectoring–Israel’s leaders. It is, after all, they whose country is the target of an armed and ideological cyclone that Obama has done precious little to ease. He brought nothing back from Riyadh and Cairo, absolutely nothing except the conviction of the Arab leaders that they need do nothing but sit and wait until the president squeezes one concession after another out of Jerusalem. Oops, I apologize. Maybe I should still say Tel Aviv. In any case, waiting is exactly what they are doing. Palestinian President Abbas has prided himself in doing just that.
In a similar vein Bill Kristol writes:
According to the article, Obama told Jewish leaders at the White House yesterday that Israel would need “to engage in serious self-reflection.”
“Serious self-reflection!†It’s really good that Barack Obama is reminding the leaders and people of Israel to engage in that. I hope they’re up to it. After all, what do Israelis know about reflecting on, and living with, the life and death consequences of political decisions? What do Bibi Netanyahu and Ehud Barak and Moshe Ya’alon — either as individuals or as leaders — know about war and peace? These are guys — and the Israelis are a people — who just coast along, taking an easy path, never debating, never thinking, never questioning, never second-guessing…and never making or asking their fellow citizens to make sacrifices.
It’s kind of odd that President Obama would on the one hand claim that it’s a misperception that he is exerting undue pressure on Israel and on the other claim that it’s good that there are differences (or “daylight”) between Israel and the United States. And this is a point that the Orthodox Union made in its statement about the meeting.
However, while the President’s acknowledgment of this perception gap is encouraging, the Orthodox Union remains deeply troubled by the President’s underlying approach – which is to have the U.S. play an “evenhanded†role. The Orthodox Union asks our President to recognize that there are no moral equivalencies between Israel, which has acted time and again to defend itself while actively seeking peace, and those who reject Israel’s legitimacy and make war against her. We look to the United States to be Israel’s friend in a world of enemies and we support the view, expressed to the President in our meeting, that while allies may of course disagree on specifics, there ought not be significant “daylight†between the United States and Israel that would give the nations’ mutual enemies comfort and encouragement.
It is a shame more groups didn’t express these sentiments to the president; it would have served to educate and persuade him of the misguided and unwise course he has chosen to pursue. The president is trying to pass this all off as a “perception†problem, which is odd for a man who prides himself on his communication skills. To be understood so badly and to have so many take away an unintended message is indeed a failure of public diplomacy.
But let’s be honest here. It is more than perception. The president told those in attendance that he doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with “daylight†between the U.S. and Israel. In fact, he thinks the failure of the Bush administration consisted of, in essence, providing too much support to our ally Israel. Obama is in the “even-handed†business — as he is with so many international questions.
However Rubin is wrong to wonder why more groups at the meeting didn’t object. President Obama wasn’t reaching out to the Jewish community, he was dictating to it. Malcolm Hoenlein, Steven Savitsky and Abraham Foxman were exceptions at the meeting. Remember three of the groups represented ( J-Street, NJDC and APN) are headed by Democratic party activists. J-Street is an adjunct of the Obama campaign as one of its founders (and funders) is Alan Solomont, who was a major contributor to Obama’s presidential bid.
Peretz and Michael Totten, for example, think that there is growing dissatisfaction among Jews about President Obama’s positions on the Middle East. I hope so. And I hope, that if it’s so, more Jews (and pro-israel Christians) will make that dissatisfaction public. I don’t need Jeremy Ben Ami – someone whose constituency is not much larger than the President’s ear claiming the he speaks for me.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
Well, Obama has a point on Israel’s need for self-reflection. Israel is a society characterized by broad consensus, little internal criticism, very little dissent, a political process that is calm and serene, and a populace whose lack of engagement with politics borders on quietism. This is, of course, in sharp contrast to the raucous free press, lively public debate, multiplicity of media approaches, and energetic and open parliaments found all over the Arab world.
But yes, Dad, you’ve hit the nail on the head: Obama is demanding specific, severe, and quantifiable concessions from Israel and demanding only words from the Palestinians, not that this is anything new. After all, he doesn’t even call for the Palis to end completely the hatred and vileness that spews out of pretty much every imaginable source, only to reduce it. And when they say they have done so, how can that be refuted?
By the way, remember that the articles of the Palestinian National Covenant calling armed struggle not a tactic but the only way, that Zionism was imperialist and invalid, etc., were supposedly removed? They’re still on the English language website and if you recall, all that Arafat claimed was that the articles were “no longer operative.”
The Palestinians aren’t even required to do something that everyone in the world would recognize as obfuscation and lying, not even to make an insincere gesture. But Israel is required to take concrete and verifiable steps and if those don’t produce the desired Palestinian response, well, obviously the solution is to demand even more of the Israelis.
From the Jews deeds, from their enemies, words. Thus it ever was.
It’s just like Obama’s promise to “create or save” jobs. Millions of jobs have been lost, but he can claim success based on the claim that “it could’ve been worse”, and hence even more jobs were “saved”.
Same for his foreign policy. He demands (no, requests, no would someday like to see considered) from our enemies terms so vague that they can always claim to be compliant, even when nothing changes (or even when they become more hostile.)
Of course, this only applies to enemies of the US. To our historic allies, it’s hard-line “do it or we punish you”. I assume this will only last until these nations decide to stop being allies of the US. Except for Israel, of course, they will always be evil in the eyes of Obama, because he hates Jews.
I don’t think Obama hates Jews, David; I think that’s an entirely unwarranted and unfair conclusion. We may not be among his favorite people but I don’t think he can be termed anti-Semitic by any reasonable definition of the word.
But there is a point that a friend of mine who lives in Chicago once made about Jesse Jackson. Jackson, he said, would be genuinely hurt and upset if he were termed anti-Semitic and in fact could fairly point to the many Jews with whom he works and socializes.
But, the friend pointed out, the Jews that Jesse Jackson knows are radicals and pretty much detached from the organized Jewish community; it’s doubtful that Jackson has as a social friend any Jew who, for example, is active in a synaaoguge. All the Jews he knows tell him about how Zionism is racist and Israel is a colonialist and imperialist oppressor of the Palestinians, or at the least that Israel is the main problem in the Middle East. That’s his source of information and when you combine that with the political mindset he has, his anti-Israelism is easy to understand.
I’d think that the Jews Obama knows are not quite such a closed group, but when Rahm Emmanuel is the most Zionist friend you have, you aren’t going to see Israel in the light that we do.
A friend in my Labor Zionist branch said she was very disappointed in Obama’s Middle East approach. I told her, “I’m disappointed, too, but I’m not surprised.”
The guy is head-over-heels in love with every anti-semitic dictator in the middle east. The fact that he personally hasn’t repeated their words doesn’t change anything. It may be politically incorrect to say, but you choose the company you keep, and most people don’t choose to hang out with people they dislike.