While President Obama was congratulating himself about doing
more for Israel’s security than any other president in American
history, three senior administration officials were working
overtime to reinforce the view that Israel is blight unto the
nations.
Last week Obama told what is a shrinking group of Jewish
campaign donors in New York City (the fact they could all fit into
a Greenwich Village townhouse tells you something) the
following:
This administration — I try not to pat myself too much on
the back — but this administration has done more in terms of the
security of the state of Israel than any previous
administration.”
Whether it’s making sure that our intelligence cooperation
is effective, to making sure that we’re able to construct something
like an iron dome so that we don’t have missiles raining down on
Tel Aviv, we have been consistent in insisting that we don’t
compromise when it comes to Israel’s security.
First, intelligence sharing, protecting Israel against
missiles, and maintaining Israel’s qualitative military edge is not
something that should be congratulated. It’s what allies do for
each other: Should Obama pat himself on the back for maintaining
military commitments to NATO, South Korea, and Japan?
Unlike how we treat other allies, at every turn the
administration is harming Israel’s security by how it acts and
talks about it. And last week and in succession, three
top administration foreign policy officials not only
criticized Israel, they emboldened the campaign to delegitimize the
Jewish state.
By turn, each official reinforced the perception peddled
by Israel’s enemies that it is a militaristic and oppressive regime
whose isolation is due to its refusal to take steps on behalf of
peace. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta claimed Israel
was more isolated from its “traditional security partners” like
Turkey, Egypt and Jordan because it had upset each in the process
of chasing down terrorists — and because it wasn’t doing enough to
make peace with the Palestinians. Set aside that
Panetta ignored Israel’s withdrawal from the Sinai, from
Lebanon, from Gaza or how it froze settlement construction for 10
months to coax the Palestinians back to negotiating.
Would officials concerned about Israel’s security offer up
Muslim Brotherhood talking points?
But Panetta’s remarks were tame compared to Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton’s
screed (“a three-minute monologue”) against a new
Israeli law that in her view restricts left-wing NGOs and demands
on the part of some ultra-Orthodox groups for separate seating for
men and women on some buses and exempting soldiers from their
communities from having to hear women sing at army-required events.
She told a group it reminded her of Rosa Parks and that the actions
were more suited to Iran than Israel.
The regulation of NGOs — as in our Patriot Act — tries
to stop aid to groups that support terrorist organizations.
Ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel have been asking for more separation
of men and women on buses and the military for some time. To object
to such actions is one thing. But comparing Obama’s “stalwart ally”
with Islamist regimes that condone rape and bar women from driving
cars? Will Hillary criticize the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt with
as much passion?
But Howard Gutman, Obama’s ambassador to Belgium,
delivered the punch line. He told a European conference on
anti-Semitism: “A distinction should be made between
traditional anti-Semitism, which should be condemned, and Muslim
hatred for Jews, which stems from the ongoing conflict between
Israel and the Palestinians.” That’s right. An American ambassador
excused Muslim anti-Semitism (and the violent expression
thereof).
The White House disavowed the statement. But Gutman’s
remarks reflect the administration’s belief that Israel is causing
the Muslim violence and terrorism it endures rather than being its
focus. Or as Barry Rubin
put it: “the Obama Administration encourages and
supports the coming to power of fanatically anti-Israel groups,
then have the nerve to say Israel is becoming isolated because it
isn’t making enough concessions! They encourage and support the
rise of regimes that are totally against any peace with Israel or
any two-state solution, and then have the nerve to say that Israel
can defuse the situation by making peace.”
So when the president says he has done more for Israel’s
security than any other president, he is right. He and his
administration — especially through this most recent set of rants
— has made Israel less secure, not more.
