Facebook Feed

5 days ago

Yoram Ettinger
2023 Jewish demographic momentum in Israel: bit.ly/40qV0aV ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

4 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
Purim Guide for the Perplexed 2023: bit.ly/3ZdlxHY ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

4 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
אתגר מרכזי לביטחון לאומי: bit.ly/3xkSwh1 ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

The Obama-American Public Disconnect on Israel

The findings of the February 19, 2010 Gallup poll put President Obama at odds with the US public, when it comes to attitudes toward the Jewish State, the Arab-Israeli conflict, Arabs, Muslims and Islamic terrorism.

 

For example, Israel maintains its traditional spot among the five most favored nations by 67% of the US public, despite Obama’s moral-equivalence and even-handedness toward the Arab-Israeli conflict, in spite of his attempts to force Israel into sweeping concessions, and in defiance of the US “elite” media and academia. On the other hand, the Palestinian Authority is ranked – along with Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan – at the bottom of the list, favored by only 20% of the US public.

 

According to an August 10, 2009 Rasmussen poll, Israel is ranked as the third most favorable ally (70%), preceded only by Canada and Britain. The low regard toward Egypt (39%) and Saudi Arabia (23%) demonstrates that Americans remain skeptical – at least since 9/11 – of Arabs and Muslims, even when they are portrayed by the media and the Administration as supposedly moderate and pro-American. Moreover, only 21% of adult Americans expect that the US relationship with the Muslim world will improve in a year, while 25% expect that it will get worse.

 

Apparently, US public attitude towards Arabs and Muslims has hardly been impacted by President Obama’s highly-publicized outreach to Muslims, as demonstrated by his apologetic speeches at Turkey’s National Assembly (“…the Islamic faith has done so much to shape the world, including my own country…”), at Cairo University (“Islam has always been a part of America’s story…”) and at the UN (“America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others…”).

 

Historically, most Americans have been suspicious of Arabs and Islam, while identifying with Judeo-Christian values, Judaism and the Jewish State, as documented by a June 3, 2009 Gallup poll. By an overwhelming 80%:13% ratio, Americans believe that Muslims are hostile toward the USA. They subscribe to Samuel Huntington’s “War of Civilizations,” much more that Obama’s June 4, 2009 statement, made at Cairo University: “America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam.” Apparently, Obama’s efforts have failed to uproot the legacy of the Islamic threat since the early 19th century war against Muslim pirates, through the 1983 detonation of the US embassy and the truck bombing of the Marine Headquarters in Beirut, the 1998 bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, 9/11, the December 2009 Ft. Hood, Texas massacre and the Muslim terrorist attempt to bomb a Detroit-bound airliner.

 

Since, at least 9/11, most Americans have held the Palestinian Authority in disfavor, 15% support and 73% opposed, according to a March 3, 2009 Gallup poll.  A definite connection has been established between the Palestinian Authority and terrorism, pro-Saddam Hussein and Bin-Laden sentiments and anti-US sentiments. In contrast, support of Israel has remained steady at 63% with only 23% opposing.

 

Israel‘s good standing has recently been reflected on Capitol Hill. For instance, 344 House Representatives (79%) signed a November 4, 2009 letter, supporting Israel and condemning the Goldstone Report. On the other hand, only 54 House Representatives (12%) signed a January 27, 2010 letter, criticizing Israel and supporting Hamas.

 

Unlike dictatorships, which manipulate results of public opinion polls, democracies are shaped, to a large extent, by public opinion. Public opinion is especially critical in the US democracy, which features the constituent as its centerpiece.  Therefore, US legislators are more attentive to voters than are other Western legislators.  They take seriously the electoral battle cry: “We shall remember in November!” Hence, the sustained support of the Jewish State on Capitol Hill, which reflects the will of the American People, in addition to the role played by shared-values, mutual-threats and joint-interests in shaping the unique covenant between the US, the Jewish People and the Jewish State.

 

 

 




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb

Jerusalem Deserves Better

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s apology to Vice President Biden – for authorizing the construction of Jewish homes in Jerusalem during Biden’s visit – departs sharply from the assertive legacy of all Israeli Prime Ministers from Ben Gurion (1948) to Shamir (1992). It is consistent with the retreating Oslo state of mind, which has afflicted all Prime Ministers since 1993. This apologetic response ignores the significant “Jerusalem Divide” between the dramatically-weakened President Obama on one hand and the majority of the American People and Congress on the other hand. Moreover, it triggers further pressure by Obama, radicalizes Arab demands, undermines the future of Jerusalem as the indivisible capital of the Jewish State, and erodes Israel’s strategic posture in Washington and in the Middle East. Placating President Obama will certainly not transform his position on Iran from engagement to confrontation and will not produce a Green Light for an Israeli attack on Iran.

 

In 1949, the US Administration, Europe and the UN exerted brutal pressure on Prime Minister Ben Gurion to accept the internationalization of Jerusalem. Ben Gurion’s response was decisive, in spite of his inferior position militarily, economically, demographically, technologically, diplomatically and politically, compared with today’s Israel. Ben Gurion proclaimed Jerusalem the capital of the Jewish State, relocated government agencies from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, expanded housing construction all the way to the ceasefire lines, directed a massive number of Olim (immigrants) to Jerusalem and upgraded the transportation infrastructure to the city. Ben Gurion’s determination and defiance clarified to the US that Jerusalem was non-negotiable. It accorded Jerusalem the land required for security and development for the next generation. It sent a clear message of credible deterrence and tenacity to Israel’s enemies and friends.

 

In 1967, the very powerful President Lyndon Johnson and the international community cautioned Prime Minister Eshkol against the reunification of Jerusalem and against any construction beyond the pre-1967 ceasefire lines, lest it severely undermine Israel’s global standing. Eshkol replied firmly by annexing the Old City, the eastern suburbs of Jerusalem and substantial land reserves and building the Ramat Eshkol neighborhood beyond the pre-1967 ceasefire lines. Thus, Eshkol reaffirmed the image of Israel – in Washington – as a dependable US ally on “rainy days.”

 

In 1970-1, Prime Minister Golda Meir defied the (Secretary of State) Rogers Plan, which was submitted by President Nixon at the height of his popularity. The Plan called for Israel’s retreat to the pre-1967 lines and for the transfer of Jerusalem’s Holy Basin to the auspices of the three leading religions. Defiantly, Prime Minister Meir laid the groundwork for a series of neighborhoods in Jerusalem (beyond the pre-1967 ceasefire lines): Neve’ Ya’akov, Gilo, Ramot Alon and French Hill. These neighborhoods – with over 100,000 residents – provided Jerusalem with the land required for further development. Golda’s defiance caused short-term tension between Jerusalem and Washington, but generated long-term respect toward the Jewish State.

 

Prime Ministers Begin and Shamir sent a clear message to the White House: “Jerusalem is not negotiable!”

 

That non-wavering message has been consistent with the American state of mind. For instance, twenty five towns in the United States – from Massachusetts to Oregon – bear the name of Jerusalem – Salem. It reflects the unique bonds that exist – since the 17th century Pilgrims and the Founding Fathers – between the USA and the Jewish capital, the Jewish State and Judaism.

 

The US Congress – the most authentic representation of the American People, therefore a systematic supporter of the Jewish State and equal in power to the President – has passed a series of bills and resolutions, reaffirming the role of Jerusalem, as the indivisible capital of the Jewish State and the appropriate site for the US embassy in Israel. Democrats are concerned that Obama’s assault on Jerusalem would haunt them during the November 2010 election.

 

US constituents and their representatives on Capitol Hill are aware that 3,000 years before President Obama entered the White House, and 2,770 years before the US gained its independence, King David entered Jerusalem – the Heart of the Jewish People. However, in contrast to the vast majority of Americans and their representatives on Capitol Hill, President Obama wishes to repartition Jerusalem to prohibit legal Jewish construction, while enticing wide spread illegal Arab construction in Jerusalem – the city which inspired the Founding Fathers of the USA.

 

The battle over Jerusalem requires the Jewish State to join forces with the American public and its representatives on Capitol Hill. This is the time to resurrect the 1999 Lieberman-Kyl initiative – to relocate the US embassy to Jerusalem – which was co-sponsored by 84 Senators. This is the time to encourage Israel’s friends on the Hill, and especially the Chairmen of the Congressional and Senatorial campaign committees, to revisit bills and resolutions, which highlight Jerusalem’s indivisibility as the capital of Israel.

 

Securing the future of Jerusalem behooves Netanyahu to follow in the footsteps of Ben Gurion, Eshkol, Golda Meir, Begin and Shamir, displaying steadfastness and, sometimes, defiance of an American President.

 

On the other hand, submission to pressure by President Obama – who is increasingly considered a burden by Democratic legislators – would jeopardize the future of the Jewish Capital. It would also raise a severe concern: Is a government which wavers on Jerusalem capable of securing the Golan Heights, Judea and Samaria? Is it capable of preempting the Iranian nuclear wrath, in defiance of the US and the world at-large if necessary?




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb