Monday, August 17, 2009

Neglecting Egyptian Political Reform

In an op-ed in today's Washington Post, Michele Dunne of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace does a great job reminding us -- and, more importantly, Obama's White House -- of the need to resuscitate the push for more democracy and human rights in Egypt. She says Obama is mistaken to have set aside these concerns in the hope that doing so will win Egyptian support for other U.S. priorities -- namely, the peace process and Iranian nukes:

But Obama can have Mubarak's help without having to pay for it with his silence. Mubarak shares Washington's interests in preventing the emergence of a permanent Hamas state in Gaza, in promoting a peace agreement between Palestinians and Israel, and in containing Iranian nuclear ambitions. He will work toward those ends for his own reasons and cooperate with the United States accordingly -- as he did even at the height of the Bush administration's democracy promotion rhetoric in 2004 and 2005.

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Making the Case Against Obama's Middle East Policy

President Obama couldn't be all that bad for Israel and the Jews. After all, some 80 percent of Jews, if not more, voted for him, a good percentage of his campaign funds came from Jews, and his Chief of Staff, for heaven's sake, is a Jew. So, he couldn't possibly harbor any hostility toward Jews or Israel, right?

Wrong!

Bush Administration State Department adviser on anti-Semitism Gregg Rickman, does an outstanding job explaining most of Obama's missteps on Israel and the Middle East, and offenses against American Jews, thus far as President in this opinion article. All should read it.

It would appear that the Obama White House lacks some serious quality control. After all, how could someone like former UN official Mary Robinson, who ignored anti-Jewish attacks at the Durban Conference, be awarded by Obama a Presidential Metal of Freedom? Don't expect American Jewish organizations to protest. According to an account in the Forward, their leaders are too afraid to burn bridges with the new Administration.

Update: Defending Nadav Tamir

Well, recalled Israeli Consul to Boston Nadav Tamir had his proverbial day in court today with the Director-General of Israel's Foreign Minister, Yossi Gal.

Gal reportedly told Tamir essentially what we argued yesterday -- that Tamir's criticisms, even if warranted, should have been passed to Jerusalem through proper channels.

Tamir will keep his job. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman will keep whatever goodwill he may have had with the Foreign Ministry's staff. Imagine the internal backlash he would have had to endure had he fired Tamir.

Tamir's apology for his lapse in judgment and his impending return to Boston will, effectively, close this matter, but the underlying public debate Tamir raised about whether it is Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's, and not US President Obama's, policies that are causing friction in US-Israel relations will continue to fester.

Obviously, we see Obama's hasty and ill-advised shift of attention to Israeli settlements and general misunderstanding of the intransigence and deep-seeded hostility of Israel's enemies as the cause of the downward spiral in US-Israel relations. Israel -- and, in particular, Netanyahu, who delivered a speech embracing qualified Palestinian statehood and continues to negotiate in good faith with US envoy George Mitchell over settlements -- ought to bear no responsibility for the tensions.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Defending Nadav Tamir

In an opinion article, former Israeli diplomat Alon Liel defends colleague Nadav Tamir, the Israeli Consul-General in Boston who recently criticized the Netanyahu government's handling of relations with the United States.

Liel, though, focuses on what Tamir said rather than how he said it.

Obviously, if an Israeli diplomat has opinions to share about US-Israel relations, he should share them -- through proper channels. If Tamir purposely publicly distributed his opinions, as has been reported, then he is wrong for doing so.

Liel says: "So what did Nadav Tamir say that warranted such fierce responses from the Israeli government?"

It's not WHAT he said that is at issue -- though, I strongly disagree with his opinions -- it's HOW he chose to say it.

Fatah Disappoints Again

The Palestinian Fatah movement (we won't call them a "political party" because many, if not all, of its members happen to rhetorically or materially support the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Fatah's terrorist offshoot) held a leadership and policy conference in Ramallah, West Bank, last week.

In this opinion article, Jerusalem Post reporter Khaled Abu Toameh predicts that younger Fatah members, who've been angling for greater leadership responsibility in Fatah, aren't necessarily going to be more pro-reform or less violent.

Sadly, the failures of Arafat and Abbas to bring peace to the Palestinian people, coupled with Fatah's humiliating defeat in Gaza to Hamas, haven't turned Fatah into a more respectable, effective movement with which Israel might deal.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Media Faults Obama on Israel Policy

Voices criticizing President Obama's policy toward Israel are increasing. Anyone interested in developments in US-Israel relations and the Israel-Palestinian issue must drop everything and read the following three referenced items:

On July 30, the Washington Post published an outstanding editorial arguing Obama's very public anti-settlement stance and general hostility toward Israel may backfire.

This followed an equally stellar piece in the Jerusalem Post by Isi Leibler calling on American Jews who voted for Obama to cash in their chits and demand a more understandable approach to Israel from the White House. (They should also, by the way, beg forgiveness from us American Jews who knew better and voted McCain.) Among Leibler's points: none other than the Zionist Organization of America was excluded from a White House meeting about Israel between Obama and American Jewish groups at which the ZOA's defense of Jewish housing in Jerusalem and the West Bank could otherwise have been heard. Shamefully, no other group reportedly presented such a perspective.

Finally, the Australian reminded anyone who needed to be reminded -- which excludes the MiddleEastContrarian -- that reformed Palestinian leadership "mature enough" to confront terrorism -- and not Jewish settlements -- is the key to Israel-Palestinian peace.

Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Obama/Biden: Right Turn on Israel

After blowing way out of proportion U.S. opposition to Israeli settlements policy and redirecting world attention from Palestinian reform efforts, where it ought to be, the White House is now starting to head in the right direction on Israel.

Over the weekend, Vice President Biden said Israel has a "sovereign right" to decide for itself whether a military strike on facilities associated with Iran's nuclear weapons program is in its national security interests.
Israel “can determine for itself as a sovereign nation what is in its best interest,” Biden said. "If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice."
Later, asked to respond to Biden's comments, President Obama, while traveling abroad, insisted the U.S. had "absolutely not" given Israel the proverbial "green light" to attack Israel but that "We can't dictate to other countries what their security interests are."

It is important that the U.S. continue to publicly recognize Israel's prerogative to determine for itself what, if any, actions are necessary to ensure its security and to assist Israel in any way possible to help provide security.