How dare you be Jewish...

Richard Baehr

Several days back, The Jerusalem Post published a laughable campaign propaganda piece detailing Barack Obama’s supposed “wonderfulness” when it comes to support for Israel. The article was authored by a Chicago political operative who has consistently carried water for Obama on Israel since the president took office. The article suggests that Jewish Republicans who oppose the president, and are trying to delegitimize him, fall into two categories - rich Jews who do not want to pay their fair share of taxes, and Jews who oppose any territorial compromise. In each case, what we have then is a Jewish writer resorting to classical anti-Semitic stereotypes, labeling Republican Jews as greedy Jews who are unwilling to part with their money or Israel’s territory.

As liberal Jews see other Jews peeling away from Barack Obama and the Democratic Party (the surprise loss of New York's District Nine House seat is a telling example), there is panic in the ranks. Hence we get this kind of “elevated” analysis. There is an attitude in the article along the lines of “how dare you be Jewish and not vote for Obama?” Hence, if you won’t vote for Obama, you must have a character defect.

The article claims that Obama’s Jewish opponents are really terrified that he will work to secure a two-state solution, which of course everyone in polite company is obligated to say is in Israel’s best interest, and will secure Israel for all time going forward.

Presumably, the author believes Obama’s efforts have moved Israel closer to peace, though evidence of that is completely lacking, given the near total absence of peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians since Obama took office nearly three years ago. The absence of talks can be directly laid at Obama’s feet. His demand for a complete Israeli settlement freeze, a demand never before made by a U.S. president, or the Palestinians themselves, as a precondition for beginning talks, provided Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas an opportunity to ignore Israel and negotiations, and instead take his delegitimization campaign around the world. If Jewish Republicans really feared a two-state solution, then they would vote for Obama, given his track record of doing almost everything possible to take a faltering peace process and make it non-existent.


But wait, there is more. The author also claims that Obama has done far more to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons than any of his predecessors, among a long list (10 commas in one sentence) of his other great pro-Israel achievements:

“Obama has called for the removal of Syrian President Bashar Assad, ordered the successful assassination of Osama bin Laden, done more than any other president to stop Iran’s illicit nuclear program, restored Israel’s qualitative military edge after years of erosion under the previous administration, increased security assistance to Israel to record levels, boycotted Durban II and Durban III, taken U.S.-Israel military and intelligence cooperation to unprecedented levels, cast his only veto in the U.N. against the one-sided anti-Israel Security Council resolution, opposed the Goldstone Report, stood with Israel against the Gaza flotilla, and is mounting a diplomatic crusade against the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state.”

One wonders then, how the author would react to New Jersey Democratic Senator Robert Menendez blasting officials from the State Department and Treasury Department on Thursday at a Senate hearing for doing everything possible to gum up the works, and prevent sanctions against Iran’s Central Bank, a step already taken by Great Britain.

Menendez had crafted the central bank sanctions bill in cooperation with Republican Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois, an example of the bipartisanship on Israel that occurs when Israel’s strongest supporters in Congress work together to get substantive legislation passed. The Menendez-Kirk effort had been drafted in cooperation with administration officials, after the White House had initially opposed any effort for sanctions against Iran’s Central Bank. In other words, the senators had crafted the bill to make it more acceptable to the White House, which then decided to kill it anyway.

Menendez was furious with the White House for pulling the rug out from under their effort:

“A visibly upset Menendez accused the officials of reneging on the agreement. 'I am extremely disappointed,' Menendez said, expressing bewilderment over why the officials in those meetings did not simply request that both senators scrap their amendments."

“'You have rebuffed us every step of the way,' Menendez said, alleging that Congress has provided the very tools that have produced success with sanctions against Tehran of which the White House now takes ownership."

“'We need to cut off the fuel!' Menendez roared at one point.”

Of course there is one and only one reason why Obama is refusing to impose sanctions against Iran’s Central Bank. He fears that this action might lead to slightly higher gas prices in the short term, which, horror of horrors, might have some minimal impact on his chances for re-election, the one thing on which the president is truly focused these days. The Obama hierarchy of values works like this: Iran gets the bomb - no big deal. I lose a Midwest battleground state due to voter unhappiness with high oil prices - that is big.

Menendez is to be applauded for having the courage to take on a president of his own party. It has happened very rarely during Obama’s first three years in office, as the president and his aides have continually railed at Israel over its settlement policy.

Many Democrats who like to call themselves pro-Israel (as the president did when he was in the Senate), can say the right words at the donor events where they collect campaign cash from the organized Jewish community, but have cast their lot with JStreet, an organization that has never had a kind word to say about Israel, and has never been shy about criticism of the Jewish state.

One such senator lamely making his “pro-Israel rounds” is Ohio’s Sherrod Brown, a JStreet favorite, who was one of only three Senators who attended the group’s banquet at their second Washington conference after many other liberal Democrats in Congress had caught on that the group was toxic, and really out of the mainstream as far as the pro-Israel community.

Of course, Barack Obama personally attempted to elevate JStreet within the community, inviting their president to his meeting with a small group of Jewish leaders, while banishing long-time Zionist groups such as the Zionist Organization of America.

The three central issues for Israel’s security, which Obama insists he is committed to protecting, are its relations with its neighbors, its relations with the Palestinians and Iran’s nuclear program. On all three fronts, things are far worse today than they were when Obama took office.

Hezbollah now has many more lethal long-range weapons, as does Hamas. The PA has become less interested in negotiations and more interested in isolating and delegitimizing Israel internationally. Egypt has fallen to the Islamists, and Israel’s entire security posture may need to shift if there is a renewed military threat from Egypt. Iran is closer than ever to becoming a member of the nuclear weapons club, maybe less than a year away. Judge a president by results. If Israel’s security is the test, Obama has failed. Or, then again, I must be greedy.