President Obama has effectively abandoned the 50-year-old U.S. alliance with Israel.
So, where is the outrage from the American Jewish community? Don’t they understand that the president is not pro-Israel? Aren’t they troubled by his history of pro-Palestinian writings, speeches, and actions? The short answer is that most American Jews are liberal, and most American liberals side with the Palestinians and vague notions of “peace” instead of with Israel’s wellbeing and security. Like the president, the U.N., and most of Europe, too many American Jews aren’t as pro-Israel as they should be and too many share his belief that the Palestinians are victims of Israeli occupation. Nothing could be further from the truth.
As I've said before, if you're a Christian legislator who observes that most American Jews have a particular framework by which they view the conflict -- one in which ending the occupation and getting a deal signed are crucial to maintaining Israel's long-term security and status as a Jewish democratic homeland -- one reaction is to say "hey, maybe that perspective has something to it!" But Walsh, of course, prefers to lecture Jews for being insane.
As I argued yesterday, it is people like Rep. Walsh who aren't "pro-Israel" in any meaningful sense. Read his piece -- I defy you to find a workable strategy for securing Israel that carries with it any more sophistication than a Michael Bay movie. There is no indication at all that he has any understanding of Israeli political dynamics, Palestinian political dynamics, the questions which are the major sticking points in negotiations, or even a basic framework of justice that could provide a future framework for piece. It's just macho bluster that could be put in bullet point form. It's embarrassing to read.
"most American Jews have a particular framework by which they view the conflict -- one in which ending the occupation and getting a deal signed are crucial to maintaining Israel's long-term security and status as a Jewish democratic homeland"
ReplyDeleteI think you misstate the view of most American Jews. I think that most American Jews want to maintain Israel's long term security and hope, not believe, that such can be done by means of creating a Palestinian Arab state that accepts the legitimacy of Israel. I also think that most, as in the vast majority, believe that the probability such can be achieved is slim to none. So, I think you are wrong both in how most Jews rank the issues and on their expectations.
I, for one, doubt there is a strategy. So, your taking on someone who has a different take on the matter, as you had a remotely sound strategy, is, to me, pretty weird. Consider the possibility, as Benny Morris just wrote, that there is no circumstance at present (and into the foreseeable future) where the Arab side will be willing to end the dispute, even if there are two states side by side.
I believe in two states. I do not, however, believe that having the President lecture the Israelis on what is in their own interest is a strategy, unless the plan is to make the Israelis as intransigent as are the Palestinian Arabs. So, I think you are living in a fool's paradise. Moreover, I think your belief that the President is pro-Israel in any real sense of the word, other than as a means to get Jewish votes and money, is anything but self-delusion.
In my view, the Israelis know their interests better than you and I do. They know them better than the US President does. And, claiming to know better than them is certainly the height of arrogance, which is something the President is a world authority on.
I think you omit critical aspects of most American Jews' views with regards to Israel. What is the Zionist dream? It is the existence of a secure Jewish democratic homeland in the state of Israel. "Secure" is important, as are "Jewish" and "democratic". To the extent that Israel's democratic character is threatened -- and it is -- a two-state solution is essential, which is why most American Jews are, I think, considerably more aggressive in pushing for a two-state solution as soon as practicable than you give them credit for.
ReplyDeleteOf course, within Israel, opinions are highly fractured on these questions. But it is wrong to say that Obama's positions are outside the mainstream. The largest political party currently represented in the Knesset, Tzipi Livni's Kadima Party, matches the President's policies with respect to Israel and the peace process almost perfectly (and I identify as a Kadima supporter). Other Knesset parties (e.g., Meretz), also undoubtedly are in line with the President's views (or at least closer to him than they are to Bibi).
Within the coalition that currently governs Israel, Independence (the Labor break-off) is also probably closer to Obama's position than not. Likud obviously does not agree with Obama. Yisrael Beiteinu doesn't care about democracy (being, effectively, a Russian immigrant party that has distinctly Putin-esque, shall we say, views on democratic principles). Jewish Home opposes a Palestinian state in principle (not pragmatically). Shas is more or less indifferent -- it just cares about maintaining public assistance to its ultra-orthodox constituents.
In any event, the point is Obama (and most American Jews, for that matter) is simply taking a side in the main current political cleavage in Israel -- Kadima versus Likud. And that's totally legitimate -- it'd be one thing if we were talking about some fringe position, but Kadima is squarely in the Israeli mainstream (far more so than, say, Jewish Republicans are in the Jewish community). Part of caring about Israel means having opinions about it (well-thought out and argued opinions, of course, not just random rhetorical bloviations like Congressman Walsh spewed out). The President has a position on what is best for Israel and Palestine -- one shared by Israel's largest political party and, if voting patterns are anything to go on, by the vast majority of American Jews. I'm comfortable lining myself up with that.
Mr. Straub,
ReplyDeleteI think you now misstate my views. And, I am Jewish and I think my views are typical.
All human beings - American Jews included - take survival is task number one. I need no poll to tell me that. After that, American Jews, like I am, want a two state resolution, as that best fits the idea of preserving Israel as a Jewish democratic state. However, something you seem to miss: most American Jews are not idiots. They know that the chances of resolving the dispute, on Kadima's minimally acceptable terms, is not currently possible. Why? It would require the Palestinian side to acknowledge Israel's legitimacy as something other than a public relations stunt.
At present, where is your strategy to end the dispute? I see it as nowhere. Now, I like the Democrats. But, when Democrats start acting as if the dispute were, in reality, primarily about what concessions the Israelis are willing to make - as if the main obstacle here were not the 80 year refusal of Arabs to accept the legitimacy of Jewish politics -, I think I am dealing with naive, foolish people.
As for the President, I believe he is no friend of Israel. I think his goal is to appease the Arabs by dumping on Israel. And, given his statements about Hamas, I think he knows full well that there is no settlement; hence, his willingness to side with Palestinian Arabs without insisting that they do in the genocidal espousing Hamas movement, a movement incapable, just as the Nazis were incapable, of accepting the presence of Jews.
SO, I do not think the President has a strategy to end the dispute and I do not think he thinks he has one. He has, instead, a strategy to appease the Arabs by using Israel's intransigence about potentially committing suicide.
Okay, time out, because your comment raises an issue that I've wanted addressed for a long time.
ReplyDeleteNow, presumably we've never met in real life. And you're reading my blog -- you're not hearing it. Which means your only exposure to my name is seeing it written out, "Schraub".
And yet, you manage to misspell it. And not in the "oops, I accidentally dropped a letter" sort of way (Shraub is very common), but as "Straub" (replacing "ch" with a "t" is more than just a careless typo).
Now if you heard my name spoken, I could imagine mishearing it as "Straub". But again -- your only exposure to the name is in writing. On this blog. Right in front of you. In the comment you're responding to. Where it is, I assure you, spelled correctly.
So how on earth did you manage to make this particular error? I'm baffled. And you're not the only one who's done this, which means there has to be some sort of systematic explanation -- but for the life of me I have no idea what it could be.
I should have highlighted, copied and pasted your name. I read it - this being my first time on your blog - and, clearly, wrote down your name as it stuck in my head. Sorry about that.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletewhat if demographics are on Israel's side?
ReplyDeletehttp://izsvideo.org/papers/Demographic%20Trends%20in%20Israel%202010%20Summary%20Update%20Eng,%20RL.pdf
Now, presumably we've never met in real life. And you're reading my blog -- you're not hearing it. Which means your only exposure to my name is seeing it written out, "Schraub".
ReplyDeleteJust FYI, the Athenian has many "tells" from the Benny Morris reference to the attachment to terms like "Palestinian Arabs" suggesting that neither of these things are true.
In which case the Straub thing is either a quick error (maybe he's just used to writing "Straub" for some reason) or a gambit. Probably a gambit because N. Friedman would just call you David.
I have my suspicion that The Athenian = N. Friedman as well (though I don't believe NF and I have ever met in real life).
ReplyDeleteI also think that "anonymous" is still Joe, even though he had promised to leave as well. Alas, in both cases, I don't know for sure. No rest for the weary.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteNot all anonymous people are the same, sheesh! I'm an anonymous person who isn't either of those people, but I have no idea about the other 1-2 Anonymouses in this thread.
ReplyDeleteWell, TA is almost definitely N. Friedman -- aside from the very distinctive writing styles and matching biographies, the IP address matches our dear old pal (which is the giveaway).
ReplyDeleteBut kudos to following the advice laid out in my comment policy and starting your own blog!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe Athenian is banned on suspicion of being a sockpuppet for N. Friedman (previously banned). Obviously, it's possible they're not the same person, but I have enough circumstantial evidence for me to believe they are, in fact, the same person. All future comments by him will be deleted.
ReplyDeleteIf I'm wrong, of course, I apologize -- but unfortunately while he was posting on this blog N. Friedman lied about his own identity, which means I can't put it past him to do something like this (and pretend to be someone else).
Fortunately, TA has started his own blog, where he is free to make whatever commentary he feels like without my moderating hand.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAre we the only demographic expected to be foreign policy experts? And then get griped at from this that and the other one whenever we so happen to voice an (asked for) opinion no matter what it is.
ReplyDeleteFunny how certain Israel obsessed Christians on both the right and left seem to have a terminal case of thinking they're more Jewish than, ya know, actual Jews. How does that happen?
Pretty sure Marni Jane is in no danger of becoming a foreign policy expert, as the "leftist" position on Israel hardly concerns itself with Revelations or any of that. Or is "Christian" just her catch-all for every demographic that is not "we"?
ReplyDeleteYour poor comments section ...
ReplyDeleteI don't know what "most" American Jews believe, but even my grandfather, who stopped listening to NPR because it was too "anti-Israel," is at a hair-pulling (what he has left, anyway), "what the hell is he thinking?" crossroads with Netanyahu.
I had my own suspicions about The Athenian also - but if it is NF, I'm glad he's finally started his own blog, rather than harassing the rest of us with overly long comments.
ReplyDeleteAnd - agreed about Joe Walsh. I find it utterly bizarre when non-Jews lecture Jews on how we're not pro-Israel enough!
Pretty sure i've made no mention of leftists and christians in such a manner as the brave anonymous commenter thinks i have, for the record. Not engaging the whiner, just making sure that's clear.
ReplyDelete