American, Israeli Commentators: “Obama is Pro-Israel”

David Streeter — March 29, 2010 – 9:29 am | Barack Obama | Iran | Israel | Stop the Smears Comments (0) Add a comment

Pro-Israel activist Steve Sheffey published a new op-ed for The Huffington Post in which he confronts the recent disagreement between the United States and Israel head-on. Here’s an excerpt:

Does all of this [disagreement] mean that Obama is not pro-Israel? Let’s keep this serious situation in perspective.

... Thus far, Obama has compartmentalized this disagreement and it is not affecting other aspects of the strong U.S.-Israel relationship. Last week, for example, Reuters and Haaretz reported that U.S.-Israel defense cooperation is flourishing. Israel continues to build in disputed parts of Jerusalem, and this Administration is not taking action to stop that building or threatening to withhold U.S. assistance or cooperation in other areas, as befits a disagreement between allies.

The current disagreement pales in both tone and substance to previous disagreements between the U.S. and Israel, such as when Eisenhower forced Israel to withdraw from the Sinai after the Suez crisis, such as when Ford threatened to “reassesss” U.S-Israel relations, such as when Reagan suspended arms shipments to Israel and supported a UN resolution condemning Israel after Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear reactor, and such as when Bush 41 threatened to withhold loan guarantees because of Israeli settlement activity. Reagan, who many consider pro-Israel, visited Bitburg, where Nazi war dead were buried, but never visited Israel.

All presidents have been a mixture of good and bad, and no president has condoned settlements or recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. The current disagreement is noteworthy because of the tone and publicity; the underlying polices have not changed on either side. As the Bush Administration said in 2008, “the United States doesn’t make a distinction between settlement activity in east Jerusalem and the West Bank and Israel’s road map obligations, which include a building freeze, relate to ‘settlement activity generally’.”

Obama fulfilled his campaign promise to boycott Durban II unless all of our conditions were met, he renewed sanctions against Syria, he fully funded the development and production of the Arrow 3 ballistic missile system, he reapproved loan guarantees to Israel, he pulled out of military exercises with Turkey after Turkey excluded Israel, he repealed import tariffs on Israeli dairy products, he supported foreign aid to Israel, and he has enhanced and strengthened military cooperation between the U.S. and Israel. He has also had an uncomfortable public disagreement with Israel about Jerusalem where I think he erred in so strongly reiterating U.S. policy in that area. No one can predict the future, but based only on what we’ve seen to date, the Obama administration is pro-Israel. Not perfect, but pro-Israel.

Sheffey concluded his piece with a very poignant reality check:

Support for Israel is strong in both parties. Don’t let anyone trivialize Israel by turning it into a partisan football. We are Democrats for good reasons.

Let’s keep our legitimate concerns about the current state of U.S.-Israel relations in perspective. The #1 goal is to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and we should be pressing all parties to do whatever they can to make progress on Iran. The rest is commentary.

 

And for an Israeli perspective, check out former Israeli Consul General Alon Pinkas’ new column in Yediot Ahronot. He argues that “when it comes to all the parameters that count, Obama is pro-Israel.” Click here to read more.

 

 

Comments

There are no comments for this entry