Obama to U.S. Jewish leaders: Israel must engage in self-reflection

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"U.S. President Barack Obama met yesterday (Monday afternoon) for the first time with 15 American Jewish leaders at the White House, for talks aimed at clearing the air following allegations that his administration was taking a tough line with Israel over settlement activity.

At the meeting, Obama told the leaders that he wants to help Israel overcome its demographic problem by reaching an agreement on a two-state solution, but that in order to do so, Israel would need "to engage in serious self-reflection."

<snip>

"One of the participants at the meeting asked the president to take a lower profile regarding the public differences between his administration and the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the United States' demand that Israel freeze all settlement construction activity in the West Bank. "This situation is not helpful," he told the president, who rejected the request, saying that during the eight years of the Bush administration, such disagreements were never made public but that such an approach was not helpful in advancing the peace process.

Obama added that there is a narrow window of opportunity for advancing the peace process and that he plans to speak openly and honestly with Israel - "a true friend of the U.S." - just as he did with the Arab nations in his speech at Cairo University in June.

Among the groups attending the meeting were the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, Hadassah, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the National Jewish Democratic Council, the Orthodox Union, the United Jewish Communities, the Union for Reform Judaism, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the American Jewish Committee and the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, which is led by long-time Obama acquaintance Alan Solow, who requested the meeting.

Jeremy Ben-Ami, executive director of J Street, who also attended the meeting, said afterwards that he believed that President Obama was asserting positions aimed at achieving two states for two peoples, a stance he claimed is supported by the majority of the Jewish community in the United States that voted for Obama."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1099966.html

[Scurrilous]

1. Israel: On The Occupation, It Is All By Itself

<snip>

"It had to happen. Once the right wing of the pro-Israel community in the United States--and their Israeli allies--realized that President Barack Obama was serious about pursuing peace, they would go on the attack.

Fortunately, the most virulent attacks have been limited to the extreme right in both countries. These are the same people who attacked Obama with vitriol during the campaign. For them, it was enough to know that he is black, had a Muslim father and had said that the United States should be an "honest broker" in its dealings with Israelis and Palestinians.

The extremists hated him before he was elected and they hate him even more now. The Cairo speech received universal acclaim except from those who clamor for a war of civilizations with Islam.

Add to that President Obama's demand that Israel lives up to its commitments regarding the settlements and you have all the ingredients necessary to drive the right mad with rage.

And others too. Some "mainstream" leaders have expressed "concern" that the anti-Obama view has spilled over to more normal pro-Israel types. They say that they are hearing anti-Obama rumblings from their friends.

Those who believe that Israel's behavior should never be publicly questioned by a president are unhappy (especially because under the last two administrations it never happened). Fortunately, this is a tiny minority of the Jewish community.

We know how small a minority from the election results last year. No doubt there were some Jewish voters who actually believed that Barack Obama would be as slavishly supportive of the hawkish position on Israel as George W. Bush, but no more than a few.

The overwhelming majority understood that the candidate, who won the Democratic Party nomination, in large part, by opposing the Iraq war and supporting dialogue with Iran, was unlikely to be utterly uncritical of the Israeli government. Nonetheless, 78 percent of Jews voted for Obama.

Most of the Jews who voted against Obama did so not because they are single-issue Israel voters, but rather because they are Republicans, and rather traditional ones. In fact, historically, the usual Republican Jewish vote was higher than in 2008, indicating that Israel was not a factor in the 22 percent McCain vote.

Nonetheless, some establishment voices are complaining and acting surprised that President Obama is acting like candidate Obama. The head of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations confronted President Obama at a White House meeting this week and charged him with allowing the impression that there was "daylight" between the U.S. and Israeli position on settlements. He did not say that he opposed Obama's stance, he just wanted President Obama to keep his differences with Israel private.

The president rebuked him. "For eight years, there was no light between the United States and Israel, and nothing got accomplished," he said.

This was a moment for the history books. A president actually had the audacity to call in the pro-Israel leadership and say what he actually believes. Not only that, it wasn't just the usual crowd that was in the room. Also in attendance were representatives of groups that do not support the Netanyahu government's hard line."

more

[GoesTo11]

2. I think Obama doesn't understand Israel

His speech in Cairo talked about all the things Arabs / Muslims think and feel. But his statements about Israel are a bit off key. He tries to say the usual US President "I support Israel 100%, they are an ally, blah blah blah the Holocaust blah blah blah". But he doesn't get that it's not about the Holocaust. For Israel, it's not about the settlements, it's not about the money. It's about the hopes of 2000 years that were never lost. It's about living as a free people in their own land, in the land of Israel and Jerusalem.

[azurnoir]

3. Gosh it must be so incredibly painful for you to live in exile

here in America how ever do find the incredible courage it must take to do it?

[GoesTo11]

4. Well, the food's better in galus.

[azurnoir]

5. Really ya think

well there are no Subway's in Israel perhaps someone should write Jarrod.......

[Donald Ian Rankin]

6. Israelis are welcome to live as free people in their own land.

What they are not welcome to do is to occupy the Palestinians' land.

The Biblical state of Israel ceased to exist millenia ago. The fact that the modern state of Israel shares a name and a predominant ethnicity with it does not give it any right to claim land that it held from the people whose families have lived there for the intervening centuries.

Modern Israel is a modern colonial state with its roots in 19th and 20th century reactions to European antisemitism, that uses the Biblical state of Israel as a justification for the unjustifiable. Obama understands this; most Israelis don't.

[GoesTo11]

7. A serious response

I am talking about how people are framing the issue. In order to gain the trust of both sides, it is necessary to understand how they view their own situations first before moving on toward win-win solutions. Obama did an admirable job in his Cairo speech of showing that he understands how the Palestinians see the situation.

If Israelis viewed themselves as you describe above, then they would view demands on them as legitimate if they were backed by power. But Israelis view it differently. As a cultural Jew, you know that Israel and Jerusalem never disappeared from the Jewish psyche. Even in medieval times, wealthy Jews in the diaspora would send money to the poor Jews in the holy land. For 2000 years, Jews were a people without a homeland and (with some notable exceptions that lasted about 50-100 years in a few countries) their living conditions ranged from barely tolerable to ragged to fatal. This wasn't just 19th and 20th century anti-semitism. Even many American Jews today still feel insecure in a gentile nation, and certainly Jews in the rest of the world and in Israel feel a level of security and freedom that they had only long ago in their history (and as a literate people, they knew biblical history). Many feel that Israel is their home, ok, in part because of a promise from God 3500 years ago, but also because of what really happened there for 1500+ years following.

With this framing, Israelis would, for example, view demands differently than incentives. Saying things like "a few missiles" doesn't fly. In practical terms, the majority of Israelis could embrace peace and giving up most of the occupied territories, but if it is framed as the world against the Jews, well, Jews have historically responded to that by circling the wagons (no matter how suicidal that turns out to be).

I am saying Obama should work more on understanding the Israeli frame and showing with his words that he understands it. Separate from what real actions occur.

[pelsar]

8. you can say the same about the Palestinians....

that the arabs in fact came in numbers after the jews started to develop the land and hence are not even native to the land, but colonialists....and what does that get you?

Whether you like it or not, each of the narratives has to be accepted as each of the histories wrote or are being written.

the jews go back 4,000 years and never lost the connection

the Palestinians go back to jesus..i understand the Jesus according to Arafat was a Palestinian.....
____

histories are partially made up, partially true, but your not going to get anywhere by trying to prove the other one is false.....

____________________
Modern Israel is a modern colonial state with its roots in 19th and 20th century reactions to European antisemitism, that uses the Biblical state of Israel as a justification for the unjustifiable. Obama understands this; most Israelis don't.

and most Palestinians and their supporters don't like to remember that there was no collective Palestinian identity until the jews came....i.e. their identity is solely dependent upon the jews. I understand this..do you think Obama does? (see how easy it is to tell someone else that their identity is actually false?)

[Donald Ian Rankin]

9. A vaguely relevant comment.

I've just started reading Herzl's Altneuland, out of curiosity. In the first chapter, the Jewish protagonist makes the following comment:

"Oh, that's what you meant. You are mistaken. I have no connection with Palestine. I have never been there. It does not interest me. My ancestors left it eighteen hundred years ago. What should I seek there? I think that only anti-Semites can call Palestine our fatherland."

I find the jest somewhat bitter...

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. Another thread on the subject of respect for national narratives:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x281791