 |
Why U.S. Candidates Should Stop Talking About Israel |
|
| Hint: It's Bad for the Jews | ||
 by Shmuel Rosner, October 20, 2008 |
||
From this Series
Both Shmuel Rosner and Jeffrey Goldberg have written recently of the need for American national candidates to stop gibbering on about Israel. "The goal of Zionism is normalcy, Jewish normalcy," Goldberg noted last week on his Atlantic blog. "This, of course, is an oxymoron, but we can still hope. The cause is not helped when presidential candidates, well-meaning though they might be, constantly invoke the existential dangers to Israel when arguing for a) getting out of Iraq; b) staying in Iraq; c) talking to Iran; or d) bombing Iran." For his part, Rosner pointed out in a long-form essay for Slate that in the Palin-Biden debate, Israel was mentioned a total of 17 times, outstripping by far references to more pressing foreign policy concerns for the U.S. (China, Russia, Europe). It's not in either country's interest to overemphasize a relationship that, however "sacrosanct" (to borrow Barack Obama's word for it), is by no means exclusive.
Jewcy invited Goldberg and Rosner to discuss their mutual fantasy of minimal Israel chatter in an ongoing email dialogue. Below is Rosner's opening salvo; Goldberg's reply will be posted later today.
Dear Jeffrey,
I'll start by repeating the core argument I was making in Slate. It was not about the importance of the U.S.-Israel alliance, or the reasons such alliance is desirable (for both countries). My complaint was about the frequency with which presidential candidates mention Israel. I think this hurts Israel because it presents is as a country that is more trouble than an asset to America. I also think that it distorts the voters' perception of American foreign policy. Israel is important, and is located in an important region. But mentioning Israel more than Chine, Russia, the European Union and its leaders (Germany, France, Britain) gives the wrong impression about the real interests and the real motives for numerous US policy decisions.
The question for this email exchange, though, is how do we make it interesting for readers. If we both agree that Israel's name should come up in the election with less frequency, the only way for us to have a debate is if we have some disagreements regarding the reasons for which we want it off the radar screen. My argument is fairly straight forward: it hurts Israel. It's not about "normalcy" (as you briefly argue in the blog item you wrote about this topic) -- it's about interests. I don't think the candidates really serve Israel's interest when they talk about it. And since both of they claim -- and I believe it to be right -- to be staunch supporters of Israel, their actions contradict their intentions. As we both know, this is probably happening mainly because of politics. The candidates think that they need to keep saying how much they love Israel in order for people --mostly Jewish -- to feel comfortable with them and to support them.
I find it to be both ignorant and insulting: most American Jews care for Israel but are not one-issue voters. They might not vote for a candidate that is openly hostile to Israel, but will hardly make the nuances of Israel-related policies the definite reason for which to vote or not vote for specific candidates. If there's a litmus test, both McCain and Obama have passed it a very long time ago. This does not mean that their different approaches to Middle East policies have no significance as far as Israel is concerned. It does mean that they can stop using Israel by way of explaining why staying/leaving Iraq is the right way to go, or why talking/bombing Iran will be the appropriate policy for the U.S. to pursue.
As I wrote in my Slate piece, I think Israelis should also grow up and stop drooling whenever a debate is moving in Israel's direction. The constant need for the husband to say how much he loves the bride does not mean the bride is lovable but rather that she lacks self-confidence. In the case of Israel, self-confidence in not just a quality that's more appealing, it is also a matter of national security. If Israelis need this constant approval, it means that they aren't sure about the US' support. If they aren't sure, their enemies might be convinced that it's really something they can further erode by pursuing more aggressive policies.
But let me ask you this Jeffrey: Is it Israel that makes Jewish voters uncomfortable about Barack Obama? you've written a lot about Obama and the Jews (as I did too), and you seem to think that something else is at play here - dare we say racism? and if that's the case, can Obama overcome such weariness by talking more about Israel? And what about McCain: can he really convince Jewish voters to vote for him by convincing them that Obama's policies will endanger Israel - or is he really going to scare Americans voters who might think that he is going to war with Iran because of Israel?
A lot to talk about, and so little time.
Best,
Shmuel
Jeffrey Goldberg's reply can be read here.
Shmuel Rosner's blog is here.
RELATED: Rosner's original piece, "Enough About Israel, Already," for Slate, and Goldberg's post at the Atlantic.
The Best of the Best
The Talmud is the first and most successful self-help tome in ...
Antisocial behavior at the ROI summit for young Jewish leaders
An absurd non-scandal might cost the World Bank president his ...
A Jewcy Catholic comes to grips with Pope Benedict's startling...
| Advertise | Privacy Policy & Terms of Use | FAQ | |  | | Comment Policy | About Us | Contact | Submissions |
| Hosting provided by Tilted Planet | ||
Rob
I can certainly understand why an Obama supporter does not want to talk about Israel. However it is slightly curious why Presidential candidates should focus less on Israel but apparently it is perfectly alright when the United Nations seems to focus exclusively on Israel, usually in regard to Israel being the scourge of humanity; much more than China, Russia and every other nation in the world.
Alan Dershowitz has a book coming out called "The Other Six Million" which argues that six million people have been killed in Cambodia, Rawanda, Darfur, ect in the last 60 years because the UN is concerned only with Israel. When Israel falls into the shadows where the United States in concerned, that is when the wolves will decend.
Of course, you end on the old racism lie. Knowing full well that for whatever unclear reasons (anti-semitism?), Obama/Biden and the left will leave Israel and six million Jews living there to the tender mercies of the UN. EU and Russia when a nuclear Iran comes into being, is disgusting because it throws a bogus dishonest distraction when REAL biogtry and hate may cause a disaster.
Shame on you for insulting American Jews in this fashion.
betty
Furthermore, it literally sickens me every time Sarah Palin delivers the old "second Holocaust" party line.
When she first ran for office in Wasilla, it was on a "We need a Christian mayor" whisper-smear campaign (accusing her Lutheran opponent, Justin Stein, of being Jewish). She quoted violent racist Westbrook Pegler in her RNC acceptance speech, a Hitler-apologist who called for the assassinations of both FDR and RFK, and was expelled from John Birch for being too anti-Semitic!
And please let's talk about Sarah Palin's pastors. Thomas Muthee brought her up to the pulpit to perform a laying-on-of-hands in which he commanded her to infiltrate the US government to combat "Israelites" who were already working insidiously to do so. Ed Kalnins preaches that critics of President Bush will go to hell, and that the 9/11 attacks and Iraq war are part of Jesus's "war plan." Larry Kroon—who sees Jews merely as a tool to bring about the End Times: get enough of them to Israel, and Jesus will return!—waxed joyful about the "great day" when God "is gonna strike out his hand against, yes, the United States Of America! There’s no exceptions here—there’s none. It’s all." Palin recently refused to headline an anti-Iran event unless she could be introduced by David Brickner, founder of Jews for Jesus, who claims many distasteful things, among them that terrorist attacks against Israel are righteous punishment from God against Jews for not accepting Christ.
Do we want an anti-Semite (or even just someone who "pals around with" radically violent anti-Semites) like Palin anywhere near our Middle East policy?
John McCain denounced John Hagee's anti-Catholicism, but stayed strangely silent on Hagee's anti-Semitism.
Shootingsparks
"My complaint was about the frequency with which presidential candidates
mention Israel. I think this hurts Israel because it presents is as a
country that is more trouble than an asset to America."
The truth behind this narrative is that the Zionists dont really want Americans to be giving any thought whatsoever to Israel. It is an apartheid state that has been illegally occupying territory for decades, brutalizes and murders Palestinian people...and since they arent done yet they REALLY dont want any one paying attention to the biggest recipient of US foreign aid...
Hayalvkatzin
Through your hate tinted spectacles you see distortions and "understand" inaccuracies.
You, I suppose, would love to live with people bent on bombing you out of existence. On second thought, why not do JUST that.
Kisses.
Hayalvkatzin
In fact, Israel matters a great deal for several reasons:
1. Jewish voters and Florida's electoral votes.
2. Counterbalance to the Mid-East's despotic regimes: Especially Iran.
3. Obligation to a true friend and ally.
4. Christian guilt expiation. Not a great reason, but still, it exists along with Israel's supposed role in their concepts of "the second coming".
5. Tremendous value of Israel's scientific and technical advances.
rlgordonma
Off-topic slightly, but I absolutely agree with this. I find it an utter mystery why any Jewish Republican, or any non-Messianic Jew, could support her, let alone not want to vomit in her presence.
Palin is essentially Hagee with lipstick.
Shootingsparks
no hate here, nor "Christian guilt" either (you will have to expound on what you mean by that)
Hows about a tally of the numbers of arabs killed in Palestine by the ashkinazi invaders from northern europe and the caucuses versus the number of ashkinazim killed by Palestinian bombers?
Either you are simply another Zionist propagandist, or you lack a fundamental understanding of the region.
What color glasses are you looking thru?
It is exactly the growing awareness of the situation is what got 18000 people in Seattle to sign a ballot initiative to require the city to divest itself of fiscal involvement with Israel..... the old saw 'no press is bad press' is certainly not so for Israel, hence the desire to bring down the cone of silence...
Isaac
Hayalvkatzin,
Shooting blanks is obviously a stark raving lunatic and anti-Semite who deserves to be ignored - just as anyone else should be who denies that the Jewish nation is no less entitled to nationhood and self-defense or that its actions don't de-legitimize its existence and must be viewed within the context of the even more aggressive and indiscriminate norms among its adversaries.
That said, what distinguishes (hopefully) American Jews from knuckle-dragging assholes like Shooting blanks is an ability to get beyond some rather primitive emotional disturbances and admit that:
1. Israel's national existence and inherent right to self-defense is not in imminent danger of being ignored or renounced by either major party.
2. An America that is weakened by not focusing on the dangers posed to it by the drift we've encouraged among the other great powers is not a very powerful ally to Israel or to anyone else.
3. Fundies are not rational and are more emotionally moved by their wet dream of ushering in a Second Coming of Christ. This may rest on supporting Israel in the short term, but only to the point where it becomes a sufficiently provocative issue globally to eventually invite an apocalyptic war that results in not only its destruction but in the deaths of most Jews, Muslims and other non-Christians. It's like being an alcoholic whose best friend does everything to enable your drinking and ultimate demise because he secretly gets a kick out of it. Only a schmuck would want that.
4. Jews should be smarter than the fundies, and especially so given the self-serving and immoral religious
delusionsachievable goals of the latter. This means being smart enough to realize that although it feels nice for their tiny nation to be recognized and supported by others and by American politicians, such recognition and support should end the political discussion on the matter; in order to allow America to stay focused on regaining a stable and less threatening global order - upon which the security of Israel rests in the first place, and which is an essential prerequisite for a peaceful Israel.Hayalvkatzin
The glasses....lol.....a scope, actually 556 NATO. Translate my 'nick'.
Hayalvkatzin
1. What the major parties "declare" and what they do are two very different things. As long as 1-4 are correct and there are many of our people here.
2. What "drift"?
3. "Fundies" (as you put it) are rational: Religious belief systems are not.
4. Your 4 starts with a prejudiced stereotype (all stereotypes are, and you should be more discerning with your thinking as you clearly are intelligent). The rest of your 4 really is self contradictory, and presupposes that it is possible to silence Israeli debate about the USA. Forget that! Israelis even debate while they sleep.
Isaac
Israelis might debate while they sleep, but if you are representative of them then they apparently don't know much about American politics and a few other things. But thanks anyway for the compliment.
I'll discuss more with you if and when you decide it's ok to challenge some of your own assumptions regarding the sensibilities of American voting blocs for the sake of entertaining what a well-read American knows of them generally, and not stereotypically. Any single person can challenge perceptions of the way their group is characterized. This is not the same thing as denying that broad conclusions can be made regarding the priorities of a group who believes, literally, and in contrast to every other American group, that economic depressions are not important because an invisible and omnipotent being will provide for not only financial needs but basic commodities. If you believe this is rational then I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.
Israelis can debate whatever they want to debate. American politicians don't really care so much about that as they do what American Jews have to say about the matter - which was the point of the article as well as my comment.
Isaac
I should have noted that your assumptions seem to be progressive ones, which is fine. But they are still assumptions that you may need to suspend for a moment in order to proceed. But I promise it will be a fun trip!!!
Shootingsparks
"Shooting blanks is obviously a stark raving lunatic and anti-Semite who
deserves to be ignored - just as anyone else should be who denies
that the Jewish nation is no less entitled to nationhood and
self-defense or that its actions don't de-legitimize its existence and
must be viewed within the context of the even more aggressive and
indiscriminate norms among its adversaries"
That you could come up with this based on what i wrote is astonishing. You are the one who is un-hinged friend...you make my argument for me thru your ravings..Shmuel Rosner knows if all Americans witnessed your psychosys and knew it represented Zionist thought it wouldnt serve that apartheid welfare states interests at all...
Isaac
Which says absolutely nothing. Address the charges or STFU.