Many
political criticisms, particularly during an election year, are
subjective and can be challenged. Has something been taken out of
context? A claim misunderstood? A word twisted? What’s special about
analyzing the Democratic Party platform over Israel is that it is easy to take the text and show how support for Israel has been reduced, in some cases shockingly so.
This
is the draft platform and it was written by experts. The problem is the
identity of those experts. This platform is a combination of “we love
Israel” rhetoric (put in by the politicians?) with some serious policy
problems (put in by their advisors?).
The
Democratic response has been denial. Oh, no, there is nothing new or
different and the platform corresponds with standard U.S. policy. The
first half of that statement is a lie; the second half is technically
true but in some ways it shows the replacement of the traditional
over-promising on Israel to what might be called the standard historical
State Department line. The base line, then, has been pulled back. If
you start out promising the kid a pony you’ve got to produce something
impressive; if your initial
offer is a text on grammar one can expect less to be delivered in the
end.
Moreover,
this is not some case of working with the left-of-center in Israeli
politics. The key issues with this platform go against the Israeli
consensus, not just Likud preferences. Finally, while more amusing than
damaging, there’s a lot of bragging about things attributed to Obama
that are either standard U.S. policy under his predecessors or due to
bipartisan action in Congress.
But
here’s the thing that upset me just as much. The title of the section
under which Israel appears is entitled, “Strengthening Alliances,
Expanding Partnerships, and Reinvigorating International Institutions.”
There is only one sentence about all the Middle Eastern countries other
than Israel! It is of vital importance for U.S. interests, and for
Israel, too, that the United States continues to maintain good
cooperation with a dozen specific Arab states. The platform is an insult
to America’s Arab allies, who have been dissed by Obama as he has
tended to help or support their enemies.
-----------------------
We
need your support. To make a tax-deductible donation to the GLORIA
Center by PayPal or credit card: click Donate button:
http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com. Checks:
"American Friends of IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line. Mail:
American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY 10003.
Please be subscriber 29,916 (among about 47,000 total readers). Put email address in upper right-hand box: http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com
------------------------
Here I'll focus on the Israel section:
“The Middle East.
President Obama and the Democratic Party maintain an unshakable
commitment to Israel's security. A strong and secure Israel is vital to
the United States not simply because we share strategic interests, but
also because we share common values. For this reason, despite budgetary
constraints, the President has worked with Congress to increase security
assistance to Israel every single year since taking office, providing
nearly $10 billion in the past three years. The administration has also
worked to ensure Israel's qualitative military edge in the region. And
we have deepened defense cooperation—including funding the Iron Dome
system—to help Israel address its most pressing threats, including the
growing danger posed by rockets and missiles emanating from the Gaza
Strip, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran. The President's consistent support for
Israel's right to defend itself and his steadfast opposition to any
attempt to delegitimize Israel on the world stage
are further evidence of our enduring commitment to Israel's security.
“It
is precisely because of this commitment that President Obama and the
Democratic Party seek peace between Israelis and Palestinians. A just
and lasting Israeli-Palestinian accord, producing two states for two
peoples, would contribute to regional stability and help sustain
Israel's identity as a Jewish and democratic state. At the same time,
the President has made clear that there will be no lasting peace unless
Israel's security concerns are met. President Obama will continue to
press Arab states to reach out to Israel. We will continue to support
Israel's peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, which have been pillars
of peace and stability in the region for many years. And even as the
President and the Democratic Party continue to
encourage all parties to be resolute in the pursuit of peace, we will
insist that any Palestinian partner must recognize Israel's right to
exist, reject violence, and adhere to existing agreements.
Sounds pretty good? But consider the following issues:
--Jerusalem
is not mentioned at all. In previous platforms, the Democrats supported
the idea of Jerusalem as being and remaining Israel’s capital and an
undivided city. The platform may adhere to U.S. official policy but not
to the party’s historic position but not to the promises Obama made to
Jewish voters at AIPAC and elsewhere. This switch has made headlines in
Israel with even left-wingers angry and upset.
--Terms
of a peace agreement. Previous platforms have clearly stated that
Palestinian refugee should be resettled in a state of Palestine. The
Palestinian Authority’s demand that all Palestinians who want to do so
with any historical claim to having been there before 1948 can go and
live in Israel (“the right of return”). This is a deal-killer for all
Israeli parties and everyone in the Middle East will notice the change.
If this seems obscure to you, let me assure you that this is of huge
significance.
--There
is no explicit reference to the Gaza Strip and Hamas, except for the
anti-rocket system. Previously, the platform called for isolating Hamas.
Obama undermined this
by demanding a reduction in Israeli sanctions after the flotilla
incident. By helping a new, Muslim Brotherhood government take power in
Egypt—a regime allied to Hamas—Obama has made this the most dangerous
front for Israel. The Democratic platform suggests that the party
recognizes no specific danger in Hamas.
--There
is also no reference to Hizballah and its threat to Israel from
Lebanon, again except for the anti-rocket system. This threat led to a
war in 2006 and poses a constant terrorist threat.
In
other words, this is part of an overall pattern of playing down the
threat of revolutionary Islamism or the idea that the Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hizballah, or
other Salafists and Jihadists pose some big problem.
On
a number of points, the party tries to take credit for just continuing
historic policies or for bipartisan things everyone supported, aid and
military cooperation specifically.
For me, the most offensive passage is this one:
“The
President's consistent support for Israel's right to defend itself and
his steadfast opposition to any attempt to delegitimize Israel on the
world stage are further evidence of our enduring commitment to Israel's
security.”
In
fact, no president has done more to do less about fighting the
delegitimization of Israel by his own statements and actions than has
Obama. And in some cases, especially regarding Gaza, he has not really
supported Israel’s right to defend itself in practice. I will leave the
Iran issue and U.S. behavior in the UN for your own evaluation regarding
this point but one could compile a long list of items in each case.
Regarding
the “peace process,” Obama’s pressing Arab states to move toward peace
with Israel lasting a couple of weeks and was never a serious, sustained
policy. He has literally never criticized the Palestinian Authority and
its behavior nor has he ever
pressed them very hard, that kind of thing is reserved exclusively for
the Democratic platform.
As
for defending the Egypt-Israel peace treaty, while Obama did make some
gesture to help secure an Egyptian pull-back last month, to portray him
as helping to preserve that document is a joke.
Finally,
past Democratic platforms have clearly taken Israel's side, making it
clear that they viewed Israel as the party sincerely trying to resolve
the dispute and the other side obstructing a solution. Despite some of
its language, this platform is neutral basically. Yes, it highlights
burdens on the Palestinians rather than on Israel, but it gives no hint
as to why there has been no
progress toward peace. This may be more understandable in a U.S.
government document and Obama is in fact the president, but this is the
party platform. Historically, the Democratic Party--pressed by members
of Congress--wanted to show that it was on Israel's side. Who better
than Bill Clinton, even though he doesn't tell the truth about it today,
saw in the 1990s how the Palestinian side sabotaged peace and the Arab
states didn't help?
Yet
this is a party dominated by a top-down group far more to the left,
less friendly to Israel, run more by the Progressive Caucus types in
Congress, and using "experts" who are often openly hostile to Israel.
They put in the boilerplate to keep the suckers--and party
moderates--happy but also subtly signal that they don't mean it.
I
will analyze the platform’s broader view of the region in another
article but again note that except for a vague promise of support for
the Persian Gulf Arab states to defend themselves, the platform sees no
other “alliances” or “partnerships” other than Israel. This section is
thus just to titillate Jewish and pro-Israel voters. If they read it
closely it would have the opposite effect.
Barry
Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs
(GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International
Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His book, Israel: An Introduction, has just been published by Yale University Press. Other
recent books include The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long
War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle
East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center and of his blog, Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.
Professor Barry Rubin, Director, Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloria-center.org
The Rubin Report blog http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/
He is a featured columnist at PJM http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/.
Editor, Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal http://www.gloria-center.org
Editor Turkish Studies,http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=t713636933%22
--
No comments:
Post a Comment