Saturday, September 13, 2008

A New Leader in Israel?

The Israeli-Palestinian crisis is notorious for half-peaces and broken ceasefires. It seems that if one side gets it together, the other side breaks down. Right now, as The Economist notes, both sides are in a funk. The Palestinians are split between the Islamist Hamas and the secularist and moderate Fatah. The Israelis' prime minister, Ehud Olmert, is resigning over a corruption scandal. Thus, new leadership is needed in Israel. I agree that Tzipi Livni, the curent Israeli foreign minister, is probably the best person for the job. Shrewd and tough, she is not a hawk. I have always thought that moderation is necessary, especially with such a contentious conflict as the one in Holy Land, and she probably has the chutzpah to do what is right.

Now, to tie this back to American politics, I think this is one more reason to elect Barack Obama. As a Jew, it is constantly assumed that because of this fact, I am an unconditional supporter of the Israeli government. I am not. While I do support Israel, I am not Israeli and have no Israeli heritage. I support Israel no more than I do Britain or France or Japan; countries I have respect and sympathy for, but not ones I am actually from. I say this because I believe the unconditonal support American leaders give to Israel begets many of the problems there. While Islamist extremism and terrorism is never justifiable (and I do not respect the legitimacy of Hizbollah, Hamas, or their ilk), that does not mean that Israeli excess is justifiable. And, similarly, while I prefer American politicians that support Isarel to those that oppose it, supporting Israel unconditonally is dangerous. In the heat of battle and public opinion (as well as a fair number of hawks in the ruling coalition), Israel often makes mistakes. Instead of pressuring Israel to rectify these, American leaders, fearful of losing the Jewish vote (think Florida), simply remain silent, giving tacit support to even some of Israel's dumbest mistakes. This only antagonizes Palestinian extremists even more. I fear this is what John McCain would do. John McCain knows no nuance in diplomacy. He hastily atagonizes Russia, Iran, and others even when it does not help the situation. And while Obama too is a supporter of Israel, he understands nuanced diplomacy and the neccesity to be able to broker peace talks between all sides in the conflict.

Simply put, McCain would not be neutral enough to be able to negotiate peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. He supports Israel too much. If you want peace in Israel and Palestine to move forward, John McCain is not your man.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

While I do support peace talks between Israel, America, and surrounding Muslim countries, I am a bit skeptical about how effective the talks would be. The idea reminds me of the concept of appeasement during WWII and how Hitler promised that after acquiring the Sudetenland he would be at peace. However, he went against his word and continued to conquer other lands. While I do hope that these peace talks could create peace in the Middle East once and for all, I feel that America and Israel may be taken advantage of in the process.