The following is a response by Tevi Troy to Rep. Steve Rothman’s (D-NJ) Politico op-ed which claims that Obama is a pro-Israel president:
Rep. Steve Rothman’s attempt to convince people that President Barack Obama is pro-Israel (“Obama’s Pro-Israel Record,” POLITICO, July 25) fails on many levels. While he claims it is Republicans who “label the president as anti-Israel,” concerns with Obama’s problematic stance on Israel extend beyond the ranks of the GOP, in the U.S. and beyond. As The Wall Street Journal noted, even “Jewish fund-raisers for Mr. Obama say they regularly hear discontent among some supporters.” Furthermore, a Jerusalem Post/Smith Poll found that only 12 percent of Israelis consider Obama to be pro-Israel.
On the substance, the weakest part of Rothman’s argument is that it is predicated on U.S. military cooperation with Israel. Most of this cooperation, however, started long before Obama, and much of the credit belongs to Congress – where Israel is far more popular than at the White House. In addition, this cooperation is not some kind of favor that presidents bestow on Israel. It benefits both sides, and it is dangerous for the future of the relationship to suggest that military collaboration depends on a president’s largesse.
Rothman focuses on military cooperation with Israel because he knows how strong the case that Obama is hostile to Israel is in other areas. Obama had Vice President Joe Biden criticize Israel during a visit to Israel. He tried to undercut Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the eve of his visit to Washington. Obama has pushed Israel on construction of housing projects and tried to establish the start of negotiating efforts with the Palestinians at the 1967 borders – which Israel argues are indefensible.
Rothman notes the pressure President George H.W. Bush put on Israel in the early 1990s. American Jews noticed – and Jewish support for Bush dropped by 24 points between the 1988 and 1992 elections.
Perhaps Rothman’s piece is evidence of his concern that American Jews could give Obama similar treatment.
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 submitted as a ‘letter to the editor’ at Politico , and submitted to YWN by the author.
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
11 Responses
“Most of this cooperation, however, started long before Obama, and much of the credit belongs to Congress – where Israel is far more popular than at the White House.”
Mr. Troy should reread the US Constitution. The US Congress has nothing to do with military operations. President Bush did indeed increase operational military cooperation, but President Obama has increased them still further, to the point that Israel is for the first time in history America’s most important military ally and resource in the region. This despite the total lack of a formal mutual defense agreement.
“Obama had Vice President Joe Biden criticize Israel during a visit to Israel.”
That was after a member of PM Netanyahu’s cabinet deliberately embarrassed VP Biden. The amazing thing is that Biden was as calm as he was.
“Obama has pushed Israel on construction of housing projects”
Every President since Lyndon Johnson has opposed any building by the Israeli government beyond the Green Line. Including Reagan and Bush.
“and tried to establish the start of negotiating efforts with the Palestinians at the 1967 borders – which Israel argues are indefensible.”
This is actually a continuation of Bush’s policy, as enshrined in the Road Map, which said specifically that a proposal for full diplomatic recognition by the Arab world in exchange for withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders should be a “foundation” of a final settlement. And despite the mantra that the 1967 borders are “indefensible”, when Israel itself has proposed boundaries with a future Palestinian State, it has NOT proposed annexing Qalqilya or Tulkarm to Israel, which would be needed if Israel were to be more than ten miles wide.
I don’t know charliehall but it is truly sad that he has swallowed the anti-israel line hook,line and sinker. Every fact that he quotes is false. It was not “a cabinet member that deliberately embarassed VP Biden” it was actually a decision by a council in Jerushalaim and it had nothing to do with embarassing Biden. The VP seized upon that to browbeat Netanyahu and obliquely claimed ,shamefully, that American soldiers were put into danger by israel, a shameful assertion.
To claim that”every President has opposed construction of housing projects”, hereby absolving Obama of any culpability. Routinely, past Administrations have issued statements deploring such building. Bot NO Administration, NO president has been so up front in cirticizing Israel and coming close to say that these constructions are illegal, a falsehood. Only Obama has brought such brutal pressure upon Israel without any, ANY, similar pressure on the Arabs.
Lastly, Obama is the first President, EVER, to adopt the palestinian position as its own. All declarations from previous Administrations that quoted the Palestinian position of the pre-1967 borders was a quotation of the Palestinian position, but NONE has adopted it as its own position, a critical difference.
I could go on to prove how hostile Obama is to israel from his Cairo speech to his volte-face on Jerusalem two years ago, proving he is just misleading Jewish audiences, to his refusal (hillary’s actually, but it is Obama’s) to put any promise in writing and conversely, deny and repudiate actual written promises made by the previous President.
Charlie- save your breath. President obama is no friend of Israel
President Obama pro Israel? Oh yeah! ¡uoıuıdo pɹɐʍʞɔɐq ɐ ʇɐɥʍ
He’s about as pro Israel as the Nutty-Ray Karta
“Bot NO Administration, NO president has been so up front in cirticizing Israel and coming close to say that these constructions are illegal, a falsehood.”
I’m sorry you have swallowed the Republican propaganda hook, line, and sinker. Here are examples that prove you wrong:
April 8, 1968
“Although we have expressed our views to the Foreign Ministry and are confident there can be little doubt among GOI leaders as to our continuing opposition to any Israeli settlements in the occupied areas, we believe it would be timely and useful for the Embassy to restate in strongest terms the US position on this question.
You should refer to Prime Minister Eshkol’s Knesset statement and our awareness of internal Israeli pressures for settling civilians in occupied areas. The GOI is aware of our continuing concern that nothing be done in the occupied areas which might prejudice the search for a peace settlement. By setting up civilian or quasi-civilian outposts in the occupied areas the GOI adds serious complications to the eventual task of drawing up a peace settlement. Further, the transfer of civilians to occupied areas, whether or not in settlements which are under military control, is contrary to Article 49 of the Geneva Convention, which states “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”
July 1, 1969
The expropriation or confiscation of land, the construction of housing on such land, the demolition or confiscation of buildings, including those having historic or religious significance, and the application of Israeli law to occupied portions of the city are detrimental to our common interests in [Jerusalem]. The United States considers that the part of Jerusalem that came under the control of Israel in the June war, like other areas occupied by Israel, is governing the rights and obligations of an occupying Power. Among the provisions of international law which bind Israel, as they would bind any occupier, are the provisions that the occupier has no right to make changes in laws or in administration other than those which are temporarily necessitated by his security interests, and that an occupier may not confiscate or destroy private property. The pattern of behavior authorized under the Geneva Convention and international law is clear: the occupier must maintain the occupied area as intact and unaltered as possible, without interfering with the customary life of the area, and any changes must be necessitated by the immediate needs of the occupation. I regret to say that the actions of Israel in the occupied portion of Jerusalem present a different picture, one which gives rise to understandable concern that the eventual disposition of East Jerusalem may be prejudiced, and that the private rights and activities of the population are already being affected and altered.
“My Government regrets and deplores this pattern of activity, and it has so informed the Government of Israel on numerous occasions since June 1967. We have consistently refused to recognize those measures as having anything but a provisional character and do not accept them as affecting the ultimate status of Jerusalem. . . .”
March 23, 1976
“Clearly, then, substantial resettlement of the Israeli civilian population in occupied territories, including East Jerusalem, is illegal under the [Geneva] Convention and cannot be considered to have prejudged the outcome of future negotiations between the parties on the location of the borders of States of the Middle East. Indeed, the presence of these settlements is seen by my Government as an obstacle to the success of the negotiations for a just and final peace between Israel and its neighbors.”
“All declarations from previous Administrations that quoted the Palestinian position of the pre-1967 borders was a quotation of the Palestinian position, but NONE has adopted it as its own position, a critical difference.”
Wrong. Bush adopted the pre-1967 borders as a “foundation” in the Road Map and made it official US policy.
charliehall wrote
“Mr. Troy should reread the US Constitution. The US Congress has nothing to do with military operations.”
Chahlee, methinks it’s you that’s got some reading to do.
U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8:
“The Congress shall have Power… To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water… To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces… To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress… To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”
“Charliehall” and “proudliberal” are 2 of the few liberal,jew hating – evil loving commenters on this website. People should be aware of them and their poisonous evil seeking scemes. One day they will hopefully realize their mistakes and stop spewing forth their false and anti israeli venom.
Charliehall, I second RabbiofBerlin.
Rabbiofberlin, let me tell you who our pal Charlie Hall is in a nut shell. He’s a radical spend leftist liberal who believe in taking money from the haves and giving to the have nots, (that’s socialism). He’s blindly supports Obama no matter what, even now how poll how Obama the incompetent over his head, jell-o, his loosing his leftist base! But he’ll always have Charlie making excuse and spinning it all day. [And by the way Charlie I love you, but I’m starting to think your miss leading, tingle in foot for Obama has to do with that conference you told us you attended a few days ago, Hamaven Yoven!]
I believe charliehall is working for obama on this blog. Nobody in their right mind can believe that obama is pro Israel. obama is a wacko in love only with himself
commonsense247 and frdm:
Actually, charliehall, while I disagree strongly with him, is perhaps the most civil commenter on this website, from both ends of the ideological spectrum. He may be mistaken about some things and correct about others, but he always attempts to back up his statements with quotes or facts.
Don’t bash him. We need more like him (except, perhaps, for the ideology). He does not hate Jews, he personally disapproves of gay marriage (even if he believes it should be legalized – sort of like people who want to legalize marijuana), and he is not Obama’s lackey, much as you may think he is.
ProudLiberal, on the other hand…