Opinions | Columnists
The wall the Illinois senator overlooked
Obama disappointingly did not mention the 'separation' or 'apartheid' wall which Israel has been building on occupied Palestinian land.
- By George S. Hishmeh Special to Gulf News
- Published: 00:04 August 2, 2008
In less than 100 days a new American president will be elected, and most likely it will be Barack Obama, the first African-American to attain that position provided he maintains his current solid lead in the opinion polls. The gifted and articulate senator has won the hearts of many in the United States and Europe, as evidenced during his recent trip to Europe, and his remarkable speech in Berlin which was attended by some 200,000 Germans and others.
But the same could not be said about his reception in the Middle East. In his stopovers, particularly in the Arab world, he avoided public audiences and even the media. In Israel, it was another story for Illinois senator. He was determined to woo the Israeli people in order to gain the support of the American Jewish community, which seems as divided as the Arab-American community about his real intentions vis-a-vis the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Speaking at the historic Victory Column in Tiergarten recently, Obama's most attractive observation was about the need to bring down the walls that separate people, as had happened in once-divided Berlin. Although he had voted for a border wall between the United States and Mexico to stop illegal immigrants, he underlined that it was dangerous to allow new walls "to divide us from one another". He stressed: "The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down."
No mention
Obama disappointingly did not mention the "separation" or "apartheid" wall which Israel is building on occupied Palestinian land to divide Israel from the Arab-populated West Bank. (Interestingly, and after a five-year battle, the "Israeli defense establishment" has finally given in by agreeing to dismantle a 2.4 km stretch of the separation wall north of the occupied West Bank village of Qalqilyah. The move will return 2,600 dunams - about three acres - of agricultural land to its Palestinian owners.)
Unlike his Republican opponent, Senator John McCain, Obama did meet Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah. But only for one hour, compared to the eight hours he spent in Israel making the obligatory visits to Yad Vashem museum, and Sderot, where he addressed the Israeli press standing in front of a display of rockets allegedly fired on the Israeli border town from the Gaza Strip.
His one-sidedness was admirably pointed out by the television stations NBC and CNN.
Obama's lame excuse to NBC's Tom Brokaw: "When you're in a region for a day, you've got a lot of boxes that you've got to check. And in Israel in particular, a big chunk of our day was meeting with not only the current prime minister, but former prime ministers and a whole bunch of people who intend to be prime minister, and it was important for us to make sure that we had covered our bases there."
On the other hand, Obama is definitely an intriguing and well-versed politician. Ali Abunimah, co-founder of The Electronic Intifada and author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse, wrote recently that since his early political life in Chicago, Obama was "well-informed" about the Middle East and "had expressed nuanced views conveying an understanding that justice and fairness, not blinkered support for Israel, are the keys to peace and the right way to combat terrorism".
Should he make it to the White House next January, Obama, unlike President George W. Bush, who waited seven-and-a-half years to focus on the Arab-Israeli conflict, has promised an "start early" because he correctly realises the advantages of a settlement. "It will make it easier for Arab states and the [Arab] Gulf states to support us when it comes to issues like Iraq and Afghanistan" - two of his top priorities at present.
Firm supporter
President George W. Bush, seen as a firm supporter of Israel, received a slap in the face recently when Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert backed away from any agreement with the Palestinians before the end of the year. He attributed his decision to the presence of an estimated 270,000 Palestinians in the Holy City, and the two recent incidents in which Palestinians ploughed their bulldozers into passing cars.
Be it Obama or McCain at the White House next January, before any direct American involvement in the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, a new team will have to be assigned - a process that might take several months.
And then again it will depend on the commitment of these individuals to seek a fair settlement that is in line with the goals of the new resident at the White House, especially if it is Obama who has been advocating "change".
George Hishmeh is a Washington-based columnist
Share this article
More from Columnists
More from Opinions
Popular in Opinions
-
Opinions
Speak Your Mind: Cyberbullying
How can we protect our children from being Cyber bullied?
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Turkey is thinking creatively
Ankara is seeking peace and reconciliation in the Middle East, but has not turned its back on the West
-
Abdullah may see crisis on horizon
Could it be that the king of Jordan dissolved parliament because he believes a regional war might be in the offing?
-
More action needed to nab murderers
Those guilty of involvement in Philippines massacre deserve the most severe penalty
