[The following Op-Ed was written by Tevi Troy]
The most surprising thing about President Obama’s press appearance with Israeli prime minister Netanyahu Friday was the way in which Netanyahu kept returning to first principles in his discussion with Obama.
Obama went first, and largely went over the ground he covered in Thursday’s speech, while noting that “obviously, there are some differences” between his views and those of Netanyahu. Netanyahu, in contrast, took Obama back to the basics of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. He explained that the 1967 borders were indefensible and that they were the “boundaries of repeated conflicts.” While Obama merely acknowledged that that “Hamas is an organization that has resorted to terror,” Bibi made the statement more starkly and tried to fold Obama’s views in with his own: “Hamas, as the president said, is a terrorist organization, committed to Israel’s destruction.” He also highlighted a specific and recent act of terror, Hamas’s anti-tank-weapon attack on a school bus. Netanyahu then brought Hamas’s hostility to the U.S. home to Obama, pointedly saying that “Hamas attacked you, Mr. President, and the United States, for ridding the world of bin Laden.”
Netanyahu further explained that the Arab attack on Israel in 1948 created two refugee problems, of equivalent numbers. In addition to the Palestinian refugees, Israel’s Arab neighbors expelled their Jewish residents during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. The difference, Netanyahu said, was that “tiny Israel” absorbed their refugees, while the Arab countries refused to do the same with the Palestinians. Finally, he brought out his trump card, 4,000 years of Jewish tragedies, including pogroms, expulsions, and massacres.
None of what Netanyahu said was new, but what was striking was the way in which he felt the need to provide this kind of a history lesson when discussing Israel’s situation with an American president. After 60-plus years of friendship between the two countries, one would think that we were past that point. Obama’s speech yesterday evidently showed Bibi that with this president, he feels the need to return to square one.
Tevi Troy is a visiting senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. A former senior White House aide and deputy secretary of Health and Human Services in the Bush administration, he also served as the White House Jewish Liaison.
The above Op-Ed was originally published in NationalReview, and submitted to YWN by the author.
DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php
(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
7 Responses
The above op-ed states in part: “None of what Netanyahu said was new, but what was striking was the way in which he felt the need to provide this kind of a history lesson when discussing Israel’s situation with an American president.”
I am not sure whether Mr. Netanyahu intended to provide a history lesson to Mr. Obama, but what strikes me is that the author thinks the president needs a history lesson. Mr. Obama’s opponents – I assume from his Republican affiliations that the author is an Obama opponent – continue to underrate his knowledge, judgment and courage, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The tough talk in support of Israel in the Bush years (W and HW) has not brought the two sides to the negotiating table. Blame either side, blame both sides, but negotiations are not moving forward. President Obama’s change in emphasis, which unequivocally reiterates and continues US policy toward the State of Israel since 1948, is a risky but perhaps wise opening to enable Palestinian representatives to negotiate a settlement with Israel. If there is to be a settlement, it will happen because the two sides think that sitting down and talking will get them what they want. To the extent that Mr. Obama can encourage the two sides to believe that negotiations will be fruitful, he is taking a small step to the establishment of peace, and he does not any further history lessons from anybody.
Nfgo3, stop it ! Face reality, Arabs only desired settlement is the destruction of Israel. You have to be rooted in reality!! As Netanyahu pointed out: ” Peace built on illusions won’t last.”.
mdd, SOME Arabs only desired settlement is the destruction of Israel. Some are willing to make peace. The problem is that the first group is the one with the guns and the willingness to shoot them at both Israel and the Arabs of the second group.
What PM Neyanyahu and this author failed to note was that Hamas — and ever other Palestinian group that commented — attacked President Obama for his Thursday speech, as it was (correctly) seen as pro-Israel.
Charliehall, 90% of ARABS BELONG TO THE 1-ST GROUP. pRO-iSRAEL — RIDICULOUS!
Charlie,
Any speech which doesn’t call for the destruction of Israel will be seen by Hamas as pro-Israel!
No. 2: You are radically more pessimistic than I am. If you truly believe that ” Arabs[‘] only desired settlement is the destruction of Israel,” and that no Arab is of a different opinion, then peace will never come to Israel, without Moshiach. That is the Satmar view, the Nutraei Karta view. If that is your view, there is no point in worrying about what Earthly politicians do or say about Israel, as the attainment of peace, in your view, is beyond the capability of human beings and entirely in the hands of Hashem.