Will the Real Barack Obama Stand Up?

By Farouk Mawlawi

ccun.org, June 16, 2008
 
 
 
In a speech before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in Washington last Wednesday, the Democratic Party’s presumed presidential candidate, Barack Obama, sought to win the Jewish vote in the November elections by making far-reaching promises in favor of Israel. Most seriously he advocated keeping Jerusalem the undivided capital of Israel. Ironically, the Bush Administration, the record holder of pro-Israel policies since the Truman Administration, responded through the State Department spokesman by reiterating that the status of Jerusalem remains subject to negotiations between the two sides. Responding to Palestinian critical reaction, Obama later back-tracked on his statement saying that he was “open to a shared Jerusalem”, and that it is going to be up to the two parties to negotiate a range of issues and Jerusalem will be part of those negotiations. This is the least one could expect from Obama who has had sufficient exposure to the Palestinian Question through several Palestinian academic friends in Chicago.
 
Historically, US election seasons produced outlandish pro-Israel pronouncements as candidates for various offices competed for the Jewish vote. A number of American Jewish organizations such as the American Jewish Congress, the Bnai Brith Anti Defamation League, and the Conference of the Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations provided forums for presidential candidates and other politicians who obliged by delivering pro-Israel speeches. This phenomenon reached its zenith with the evolution of AIPAC as the principal pro-Israel lobby in the United States. A lobby that has taken credit for defeating some of the most prominent former senators and congressmen who advocated even-handed approach to Middle East issues, such as J.W. Fulbright, Charles Percy, Pete McCloskey and Paul Findley to name a few. AIPAC often promoted opposing candidates, made financial contributions to their campaigns, both directly and through members, and even conducted smear campaigns against candidates who deviated from pro-Israel positions. AIPAC’s influence over American media gave it considerable advantage in pursuing its political agenda.
 
Competing presidential candidates gladly accepted invitations to address AIPAC’s conventions which are timed to coincide with election seasons. Invariably they made statements favoring Israel and resorted to hackneyed descriptions of Israel as America’s best friend and only democracy in the Middle East. Ensuring Israel’s military supremacy over any combination of Arab states figured prominently in such speeches which are usually written by special advisors on Jewish Affairs. Conversely, advisors on Arab Affairs, if they existed, were tasked with discreetly canvassing votes of the American-Arab communities.
 
Recent years however saw the evolution of an American-Arab lobby that has begun to make limited inroads on the political arena. Globalization brought about a penetration of the previously Zionist dominated institutions and media. American Arab professors and activists found ways to air their views on television, and to have their writings published in newspapers and magazines. More important are the numerous books and articles that are written by distinguished American academics and former officials as well as European and Israeli journalists. President Carter’s book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid” stands out as a reflection of the new awakening on Middle East issues, as does the criticism of the pro-Israel lobby by professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt. Former administration officials such as Zbignew Brezinski and Robert Malle, both of whom were dropped from Obama’s advisory group on foreign policy, have spoken and written objectively on Middle East issues.
 
Political scientists and observers recognize the fact that statements made by presidential candidates during their campaigns are seldom followed through when they occupy the office. After all, national interests cannot be entirely sacrificed in favor of political expediency and harmful domestic considerations. They also learn on the job what they recklessly advocate prior to holding office. Both Presidents Ford and Carter who staunchly supported Israel on the campaign trail ended up pursuing relatively even-handed policies as presidents, and strong critics of Israel after leaving office. As a congressman from Michigan, Gerald Ford was the first American politician to call for moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. He did not follow through on that statement when he became president. Numerous other politicians since, advocated the same course, but the embassy remains in Tel Aviv.
 
 
The writer is a former senior official of the Arab League and the United Nations
Currently president of the Lebanon Chapter of the Association of Former International Civil Servants.