Obama has to crawl before he can run

Has any presidential candidate spoken out about Gaza's humanitarian crisis? Don't hold your breath.

On Wednesday, January 23, 2008, the British proPeace site, Jews sans frontieres, posted this article: US Presidential race: Obama has to crawl before he can run.

It would appear that our presidential hopefuls are intentionally avoiding Israel-Palestine in their debates. But recent news about the Gaza crisis, which has led to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians crossing the Egypt border to obtain sustenance for their families, brought the issue into the front pages of American media. But it has received silence among the presidential candidates.

Mark Elf, the proprietor of Jews sans frontiers (Jews without borders), speaking just about Barak Obama, said

I don't know. Perhaps it's a hoax but let's assume it isn't. Presidential hopeful, Barack Obama, has written a particularly assertive email to the UN Security Council regarding the Gaza blockade.

The letter was actually published on Rosner's blog in the otherwise liberal Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz. Rosner is a right wing journalist for Ha'aretz, which apparently attempts to maintain a balance of views.

Comparing McCain and Obama on Gaza was its title.

According to Rosner, the letter from Obama was send first, the one from McCain second. Obama sent it to Khalilzad, McCain to Condi Rice.

Here is McCain's letter:

The United Nations Security Council resumed today its discussions regarding a compromise statement that would address the situation in Gaza. As you know, UN statements have often served as platforms for rhetorical attacks against Israel by various member states. I urge you to ensure that this pattern does not repeat itself.

The United States should oppose any UN statement or resolution that fails to condemn vociferously the terrorist tactics employed by Hamas, including its rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. For the Security Council to address the humanitarian situation in Gaza without reference to the Israeli security situation would constitute a failure of responsibility (Obama wrote: I urge you to ensure that the Security Council issue no statement and pass no resolution on this matter that does not fully condemn the rocket assault Hamas has been conducting on civilians in southern Israel).

Hamas, which rules Gaza, has committed itself to the destruction of the Jewish state and has conducted hundreds of rocket attacks against Israel in recent days. After Israel resumed fuel supplies to the Gaza power plant yesterday and electricity was restored, rockets continued to fall on civilian areas in Israel.

The United Nations charter, which makes clear the inherent right of self-defense against armed attacks, applies to all states - including the State of Israel. In the face of continued violence by Hamas, Israel has taken steps to guarantee its security (Obama wrote: we have to understand why Israel is forced to do this... Israel has the right to respond while seeking to minimize any impact on civilians). I urge you to ensure that the Security Council recognizes Israel's right to do so and condemns Hamas for its continued campaign of violence against innocent civilians.

Sincerely,
John McCain
U.S. Senator"

No question that McCain has done his crawling. Now here is Rosner's preamble to Obama's letter:

Obama the hawk.

As if Obama did not have enough troubles with the pro Israel camp, the left is not starting to hammer him for supporting Israel too much. Look at this article from Tikkun (the proPeace blog run by Rabbi Michael Lerner):

Earlier in his career, Obama took a relatively balanced perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, aligning himself with positions embraced by the Israeli peace camp and its American supporters. For example, during his unsuccessful campaign for Congress in 2000, Obama criticized the Clinton administration for its unconditional support for the occupation and other Israeli policies and called for an even-handed approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. He referred to the "cycle of violence" between Israelis and Palestinians, while most Democrats were referring to "Palestinian violence and the Israeli response." He also made statements supporting a peace settlement along the lines of the Geneva Initiative and similar efforts by Israeli and Palestinian moderates.

During the past two years, however, Obama has largely taken positions in support of the hard-line Israeli government, making statements virtually indistinguishable from that of the Bush administration. Indeed, his primary criticism of Bush's policy toward the conflict has been that the administration has not been engaged enough in the peace process, not that it has backed the right-wing Israeligovernment on virtually every outstanding issue.

Rejecting calls by Israeli moderates for the United States to use its considerable leverage to push the Israeli government to end its illegal and destabilizing colonization of the West Bank and agree to withdraw from the occupied territories in return for security guarantees, Obama has insisted "we should never seek to dictate what is best for the Israelis and their security interests" and that no Israeli prime minister should ever feel "dragged" to the negotiating table.

Senator Obama's letter, however, speaks for itself:

Dear Ambassador Khalilzad,

I understand that today the UN Security Council met regarding the situation in Gaza, and that a resolution or statement could be forthcoming from the Council in short order.

I urge you to ensure that the Security Council issue no statement and pass no resolution on this matter that does not fully condenm the rocket assault Hamas has been conducting on civilians in southern Israel...

All of us are concerned about the impact of closed border crossings on Palestinian families. However, we have to understand why Israel is forced to do this... Israel has the right to respond while seeking to minimize any impact on civilians.

The Security Council should clearly and unequivocally condemn the rocket attacks... If it cannot bring itself to make these common sense points, I urge you to ensure that it does not speak at all.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama
United States Senator

Needless to say, about the Gaza crisis, the US supported Israel in the UN Security Council, which it always has, in this case in spite of its humanitarian implications.

Mark Elf continued to say that it was outrageous if not a hoax. On the other hand, he noticed a Rosner statement from a few days earlier:

Barack Obama keeps having troubles with the pro Israel crowed.

Yesterday, speaking on the occasion of Martin Luther King's day to the African American community, Obama was saying that "If we're honest with ourselves, we'll acknowledge that our own community has not always been true to King's vision of a beloved community. We have scorned our gay brothers and sisters instead of embracing them. The scourge of anti-Semitism has, at times, revealed itself in our community."

But condemning anti Semitism does not help him score enough points with the Jewish establishment. Yesterday, the Jewish Forward revealed an American Jewish Committee memo that's raising questions about his stance regarding Israel:

"The Senator's interpretation of the NIE raises questions," wrote Debra Feuer, a counsel for the American Jewish Committee, one day after the Illinois Democrat surged to victory in the Iowa caucus.
Referring to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, she added that Obama "appears to believe the Israelis bear the burden of taking the risky steps for peace, and that the violence Israel has received in return does not shift that burden."

I wrote a couple of paragraphs about Obama and Israel Saturday night. One of them says this: "The American Jewish establishment feels much more comfortable with a Clinton candidacy than it is with an Obama candidacy".

And this is not likely to change.

The question that Mark Elf asks: does Obama think that crawling to the "pro-Israel crowd" is going to change that? And did you see that stuff about antisemitism and homophobia in the black community?

He goes on,

Has a senator ever chosen a special Jewish commemoration to lecture against racism and homophobia in the Jewish community?

Obama should be careful with this crawling. What does he gain among ordinary voters who must surely be getting sick of Israel by now. If he starts acting like Hillary Clinton, or even Bush, his core support will surely drift away. This happens to Democrats all the time lately. They try to out-right the right and the right still wins. Of course the right wins when the Democrats put it in a win-win situation. But what if the crawling works and the Zionist vote or funding or both is decisive and he wins? If he wins on a right wing platform he will have to stand by that platform, indeed he may want to. My own view is that, by so obviously groveling to the establishment on the question of Palestine, he can only harm his candidacy.

So a word from the wise: Obama should be careful with this crawling. Hillary has been at it for a few decades. She did not even think it inappropriate to meet with Avigdor Lieberman, Israel's most vile racist at the Saban Institute a year ago. Hillary will go (and has gone) to extraordinary measures to one-up any candidate on Israel, which usually means subordination to the right wing.

Obama's effort to get into this game is futile. Perhaps it would be more beneficial for him to speak as a pro-civil and pro-human rights liberal Democrat.

Tags: AIPAC, barak obama, Hillary Clinton, Israel, John McCain, Palestine (all tags)

Comments

15 Comments

What bullshit

Do you really think Obama wrote his...letter like this...with dots in the middle?   Where's the whole letter or even any verification that this letter is authentic?

A word to the wise is when you have something that you think may be a hoax you don't circulate in public until you are certain it isn't.

by Piuma 2008-01-24 07:42AM | 0 recs
Re: What bullshit

The letter was published in Ha'aretz in a respected column. However, I found the letter to be quite compatible with Obama's more recent conformance to the positions of the righ wing slanted Israel lobby.

You may be correct. But the letter has been out there for a few days and I haven't seen any retractions or denials from the Obama camp. I also notice that no one doubts the veracity of the McCain letter. Why? Because no one has sucked up to the Israel lobby like McCain, with the sole exception of Hillary.

by shergald 2008-01-24 09:46AM | 0 recs
Re: What bullshit

McCain's letter scans like a real letter from a Senator would scan.  Obama's letter... on the other hand... kinda reads like this... which doesn't sound right... if you follow me.

Maybe they haven't denied it because the purported letter hasn't gotten any play at all in the American press.  If you google it, you find a handful of blogs, including Rosner's.  Obama is working hard to get right on Israel and probably can't be seen walking around with a copy of Ha'aretz.

Why not give Obama's Senate office a call and ask if they know anything about it?

by Steve M 2008-01-24 09:56AM | 0 recs
Re: What bullshit

So McCain's letter is real, but Obama's isn't.

You must have some proof of this. I provided my authority, a respected Israeli newspaper. What is your proof that it is not legitimate? I have not seen any retractions from the newspaper.

Because you don't like what the Obama letter says is not reason to doubt its validity. Personally, I don't like the idea that a foreign government is influencing our presidential election, but that is just what seems to be happening. Of that I have no doubt.

by shergald 2008-01-24 11:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

Something is very fishy about this story.

By the way, I don't recall Hillary taking a hard line on Israel for "decades," I seem to recall she discovered this position sometime around 1999.  As for why, I cannot imagine.

by Steve M 2008-01-24 08:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

Please, please. Hillary hasn't taken a hard proIsrael line? You have to be kidding. She sponsored the antiPalestinian Terrorist Act, a pure piece of propaganda, voted for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, and actually proferred a false notion on the floor of the Senate about Palestinian textbooks, where she introduced its leading propagandist. Let me not even mention her willingness to meet publically with Avigdor Lieberman, Israel's most vile racist and promoter of transferring Arab Israeli (Palestinian) citizens out of Israel so that it could be a pure Jewish state. Bill was there with her at the Saban Center where this happened a year ago.

So please, please, give us a break.

by shergald 2008-01-24 09:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

Which of those things you mention did she do before 1999?  It's as if you didn't even read my comment.

by Steve M 2008-01-24 09:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

In 1998, before the Camp David/Taba meetings, Hillary said she was for two states. Since then, nada, nothing.

Since then she has supported the most right wing Likud version of any settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians: no independent state, bantustans if anything, Palestinians as terrorists rather an oppressed people fighting a 40 year military occupation, and any Zionist propaganda whatever it is, including the view that Israelis are the victims rather than the Palestinians, who are terrorists. Her plan for Israel-Palestinian is nonexistent. She is clearly to the right of Bush, who recently stated that the 40 year occupation must stop, and there must be two sovereign contiguous states in accordance with the Road Map.

Where is Hillary's Road Map? DOn't respond. There isn't any. Why? Because Hillary is supporting the right wing Likud view that all of the West Bank belongs to Israel and Jerusalem should never be divided. She her website if you don't believe that latter point. She is right wing on Israel and under her presidency there will only be more strife and death in Israel-Palestine.

When you respond next time, look up the record.

by shergald 2008-01-24 11:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

It sounds like you agree with me.

Whenever you get around to reading what I said, perhaps you'll realize that.

by Steve M 2008-01-24 11:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

Not quite understanding you. Are you saying that we are now to vote on the basis of Hillary Clinton, the 1998 version.

Sorry, you may be correct, but I'm afraid, totally irrelevant, if you don't mind my saying so.

by shergald 2008-01-24 05:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

My point is that I don't believe Hillary has been an Israel hawk for "decades," but that she adopted that position shortly before deciding to run for Senator from New York.  Do you disagree?

by Steve M 2008-01-24 06:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

Already mentioned her unmentionables and her right wing Zionist views concerning the IP conflict, including two states, Jerusalem, and her getting on the propaganda bandwagon about so-called "Palestinian terrorists," people otherwise fighting a military occupation and colonization of what remains of their lands. Whatelse is there to say? Hillary was for two states in 1998. Apparently she has changed her mind.

Where is she on the Bush Road Map? Where is she on Bush's last statement regarding the conflict: that "the 40 year military occupation of the Palestinians must end?"

And wasn't it the Clinton administration that did more damage to the prospect of peace than any other administration?

by shergald 2008-01-25 04:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

This blog has what purports to be a complete version of the letter.  There's no link or source provided, so it's not clear where the author got it from.

   Dear Ambassador Khalilzad,

   I understand that today the U.N. Security Council met regarding the situation in Gaza, and that a resolution or statement could be forthcoming from the Council in short order.

   I urge you to ensure that the Security Council issue no statement and pass no resolution on this matter that does not fully condemn the rocket assault Hamas has been conducting on civilians in Southern Israel for over two years.

   All of us are concerned about the impact of closed border crossings on Palestinian families. However, we have to understand why Israel is forced to do this. Gaza is governed by Hamas, which is a terrorist organization sworn to Israel's destruction, and Israeli civilians are being bombarded by rockets on an almost daily basis. That is unacceptable and Israel has a right to respond while seeking to minimize any impact on civilians.

   The Security Council should clearly and unequivocally condemn the rocket attacks against Israel, and should make clear that Israel has the right to defend itself against such actions. If it cannot bring itself to make these common sense points, I urge you to ensure that it does not speak at all.

   Sincerely,

   Barack Obama
    United States Senator

I can't even imagine the purpose of Rosner's omissions because they're obviously quite trivial.

It's quite impressive that he managed to keep this letter so "off the record" but I have a feeling everyone in the peace camp is going to know pretty soon.  Interesting.

by Steve M 2008-01-24 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

I would write the editor of Ha'aretz, a well known Israeli newspaper if you feel the letter is a fraud. It is also the case that Rosner covers Washington, DC for the newspaper. If he too is a fraud, then he should be exposed.

In the meantime....

by shergald 2008-01-24 05:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has to crawl before he can run

I don't feel the letter is a fraud.  What I said is that the letter quoted by Rosner, with sentences trailing off into ellipses, didn't sound like an authentic letter from a US Senator.

by Steve M 2008-01-24 06:12PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------