Top Priority or Empty Promise?
October 8, 2008
Israel
(1 comments)
By Jeff Oakley
(First posted on the RACBlog)
Jeff Oakley is an Eisendrath Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.
Last week, Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin stated that "a two-state solution is the solution... and that will be [a] top of an agenda item, also, under a McCain-Palin administration." Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden stated, for his part, that "no one in the United States Senate has been a better friend to Israel than Joe Biden" and that Obama will bring "thoughtful, real, live diplomacy that understands that you must back Israel in letting them negotiate, support their negotiation, and stand with them."
From the claims of the campaigns, getting down to business with
Israel in reaching a two-state solution to the conflict will be a top
priority. For myself, as a part of the Reform movement, which
enthusiastically calls for such an approach, these claims are great to
hear. To achieve success in negotiations, the next President simply
cannot withhold enthusiasm and dedication to solving the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict until their lame duck months (as the last
two have).
Will the same pattern of passivity and procrastination return with
the next President, regardless of the electoral campaign promises?
Ha'aretz columnist Yoel Marcus certainly thinks so, writing today that
"Israel won't top the agenda for Obama or McCain."
With an economic
crisis, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the challenges of Iran,
Pakistan, Russia, China, health care, tax policy, immigration,
education, energy independence, environmental policy, and much more to
think about (a McCain adviser had earlier claimed there to be as many
as 30 more important crises in foreign policy alone), the 44th
President will indeed have pressing issues that could easily lead to
Israel being shuffled to the back of the line.
However, given the
failures that have resulted with such an approach, I believe strongly
that a failure to keep the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a high
priority of the administration will not benefit the United State or
Israel. So, with Palin claiming that a two-state solution will be at
the top of the agenda, and Biden scolding the Bush administration for
only "trying to turn it around now in the seventh or eighth year", and
insisting on "thoughtful, real, live diplomacy", there may be hope yet
for diplomacy.
Given the urgent need for American leadership in ensuring that the talk
about a two-state solution becomes a reality, to ensure Israel's
long-term security, viability, and prosperity, I'm certainly hoping
that the next President will stick to the promises made this fall to
provide that leadership.
Comments
Post a comment
|
Print
Email
Comment
I don't believe Sarah Palin desires to be the leader of the Tea Party Gang. I don't suppose the Tea Party lacks or demands a leader. The Tea Party should have no certain political party to select from. What I believe is that they will pick individuals instead of political party tie. You can have politicos from neither side as long as they vote the direction their voters desire them to vote.