Opinions | Columnists
Obama chases the Jewish vote
But despite the Illinois senator's pro-Israel views, many Jewish Americans are likely to vote for McCain.
- By As'ad Abdul Rahman, Special to Gulf News
- Published: 23:47 March 21, 2008
- Image Credit:
No one doubts the fact that the impact of the Jewish lobby on the results of the US presidential campaign continues to be huge and effective. This, to an extent that it makes candidates embrace policies aligned completely to those of Israel.
Recently, the Washington Post touched on this issue in a report by Jonathan Weisman, who carefully examined Republican attacks against the Democratic candidate Barack Obama with regard to the latter's commitment towards Israel's security and future as "the only stable, democratic state" in a volatile region.
For his part, Obama didn't want to miss these influential votes. So he turned to the Jewish-Zionist society to reassure them that Israel's security is sacrosanct, and to publicly turn down the support offered to him by the anti-Israel chairman of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan.
Obama said that "Farrakhan's frequent, hostile statements against Israel and the Jews are unacceptable and should be renounced. That's because I see myself as a close friend of Israel, which can be labelled as one of our best allies in the Middle East".
Dangerous threat
In an interview with the Israeli daily Yediot Ahranot, Obama emphasised that he does not believe that diplomacy alone can stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons and that "there could be a need for force to achieve that goal".
He said: "Iran poses today the most dangerous threat to Israel", adding that "the threats articulated by the Iranian president to destroy Israel cannot be taken as mere rhetoric", and that he, as the US president, would take up the task of "removing that threat".
In spite of all these pledges, several members of the Democratic Party's leadership have confirmed that many Jews would vote for the Republican candidate, John McCain, as American Jews are not sure about Obama's intentions and policies towards Israel's security.
Indeed, Obama has condemned the catastrophic war on Iraq, and said "it should not have been launched, and neither should it have been allowed". Since then, he has been reiterating his intention of withdrawing US troops from that country, and starting talks with Iran and Syria.
Hence it is quite natural that such views invoke fear among Israeli hawks and among their staunch American supporters, and others as well.
These people also criticised Obama when he once said, "The Israeli government should make hard concessions in order to revive the peace process," explaining a fact that no people in the world have been exposed to such suffering as the Palestinians.
Obama spoke - at a meeting in Cleveland with the US Jewish leadership - about the fear of free discussion and freedom of expression in America when the Israel issue is on the table, and he expressed his surprise at the "open discussions" on the subject in Israel when he visited the country.
Blamed
He also stressed that he "disagrees with the idea that not adopting the Likud's policy when it comes to Israel means you are "anti-Israel". Obama went on to say that he was against all "forms of pre-determined condemnation and debate on hard questions when it comes to Israel".
However, in spite of his demand that Hamas recognise "Israel's right to exist", so that it can have a seat in the negotiation table, Obama continued to be blamed.
He also spoke out of his understanding that Israel's "enemies are determined to destroy it". Still, Obama's aides are accused by the Zionists of being Palestinian sympathisers, so they are seen as "problematic" and "suspicious" figures by Israel.
Obama defended them, saying that none of them had ever challenged the fundamental basis of relations with Israel, namely "ensuring its security and providing it with military and economic aid", but also committed to the "two-state solution", and that Israel should remain a "Jewish state".
The Zionist propaganda machine also targeted former US president Jimmy Carter, and his team of advisers, especially former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who is convinced that the Jewish lobby runs the current US policy, which is counter to American interests.
Besides, the Zionists are also suspicious of Obama's relationship with the Rev Jeremiah Wright and other anti-Israel Christians.
Here arises the question: whose policy is good for Israel? Is it Obama's or that of neo-conservatives? On his part, commentator Patrick Seale, in an article entitled "Obama is good for Israel" (Gulf News, February 29), asked Israel and its friends to think which was better for Israel: the solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict or the ongoing violent confrontation?
Seale concluded by saying that "instead of fearing and smearing Obama, Israel and its friends might consider that he just might be the US President who can bring peace to the Middle East at last, and effect a much needed reconciliation between the West and Islam.
"Is not overseeing Israel's peaceful integration into the Arab world far better for its long-term security and prosperity than Bush's bankrupt policies of making war on Iraq, threatening Iran and Syria, encouraging Israel's wars on Hezbollah and Hamas - policies which have done nothing but create a thirst for revenge and hate for the US and Israel throughout the Arab and Islamic world, and beyond?"
The question now is who is listening to reason among the Israeli ruling circles and its supporters in the United States.
Professor As'ad Abdul Rahman is the Chairman of the Palestinian Encyclopedia.
Share this article
Popular in Opinions
-
Opinions
Speak Your Mind: Cyberbullying
How can we protect our children from being Cyber bullied?
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Mosque razing ruling exposes India polity
It would be tragic if those who demolished the Babri Masjid went scot-free
-
All eyes on Obama
Failure to outline an effective strategy at West Point could cost the US president not only victory in Afghanistan, but the White House itself
-
A year after 173 defenceless people were killed
Mumbai itself is far from safe from another deadly attack, even though the level of security consciousness of the average Mumbaikar has been raised since 26/11
