As Arab Americans across the country eulogize Senator Barak Obama’s enlightened foreign policy positions and vociferously campaign for his nomination, we should understand that a president can only do so much. This is largely due to the fact that a monarchy-wary nation imposed formidable checks on the presidential powers of the executive branch. Our Congress can obstruct the president at every turn through purse strings, impeachments and, even, withholding declarations of war if it chooses to do so.
Past presidents who have been sympathetic to the Palestinian cause were severely limited by a Congress that simply toes the Israeli line, even President Bush’s aid to the Palestinians was often restricted by Congress to pay for Israeli expenditure such as building checkpoints in 2005. If Congress finds President Bush too pro-Palestinian, surely Senator Obama is in for a ride.
America’s one-sided support of Israel and the Israeli prism through which it views Middle Eastern policy are detrimental to American national interests, a fact that has been much debated, regurgitated, and confirmed by pundits and academics alike. The reason for the seeming contradiction is domestic policy. The pro-Israel lobby machine with all its think tanks, civil rights organizations, pro-Israel PACs, journalists, and politicians has a strong presence in Washington’s halls of power and even more impressively they put their money where their loud mouths are.
The combination of a strong lobby and an American public that is ignorant and uninterested in Palestine and, yes, Israel makes for a very pliant Congress, a good reason why you have probably never seen a senator or a representative of the House criticize Israel on national media. To do so would be political suicide. There are a few brave souls like James Abourezk who have paid a dear price and a few exceptions like Chuck Hagel of Nebraska who spoke out for Lebanon during the 2006 Israeli-Lebanese war.
Yet, still, we don’t see Chuck Hagel running for president. Despite Barak Obama’s strong pro-Israel stance during the Israel-Lebanon war in 2006 and his insistence that Israel has a right to defend itself as Gazans broke free from their oversized prison, Israeli media slaps him with the crippling label: “bad for Israel”, as if they ever knew what was good for her. The reality is an American president that is good for Israel must help wean the country off the Palestinian lands it occupies.
As it turns out, Barak Obama simply has to play the game if he is to win the presidency. His good intentions to the Palestinians are well known. He has recently commented that “no body is suffering more than the Palestinian people” and somehow still managed to stay in the race for the democratic nomination. When Howard Dean remarked that the United States should be unbiased in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the democratic primary in 2004, the walls of his campaign collapsed right around him.
Mr. Obama is also refreshingly diplomatic about handling Iran and the nuclear threat that it poses. His understanding of foreign policy would make it unlikely that he plays the stooge for any set of advisers as has happened with the current president. Moreover, his stance toward Arab dictators may not be as conciliatory.
Our hope in the Man of Hope should not be overstated, however. This is still the same political system with the same players. A strong and credible Arab Lobby is sorely needed. There are a few Arab and Muslim civil rights groups like the ADC and CAIR, educational ones such as the AAI, but there is no political action committee that can lobby the US government on behalf of Arab and Muslim Americans, and indeed all Americans, to find a just solution for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and to reverse its more pernicious side effects: sclerotic Arab dictatorships and a deficit of human rights in the region.
At the end of the day, Barak Obama is the best possible choice for Arab Americans but he will not suffice. Or as he so beautifully put it, we are the change we seek!
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Lobbying Our Way to the Promised Land
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Barak Obama has voiced support for Israel, its Defense Forces, and the IDF's right to destroy Israel's enemies--which include the Palestinian terrorists, and many Arab-American terrorists. The only good Arab-American terrorist is a dead Arab-American terrorist.
What about good American terrorists?
What about good American terrorists?
Only supporters of terrorism say things like that, Will. Enough. Get the fuck out of here, asshole. Go join HAMAS and fight your little jihad over there, dickhead.
Sama! Merhaba fee blog'na!
Excellent first post. Incisive and eloquent. I mean, I know you have a good vocabulary, but still :)
Don't pay attention to these losers pat and programmer craig, I'm sorry they have soiled our welcome mat for you :)
Thanks Mehammed for the warm welcome. Tu es superb comme toujours!
"At the end of the day, Barak Obama is the best possible choice for Arab Americans but he will not suffice. Or as he so beautifully put it, we are the change we seek!"
but he may be at least the beginning of a change, even on this issue, and that's more than can be said about the rest of them.
I for one am interested in getting involved in Arab-American lobbying efforts so if you have a good tip about how/where to start hep me to it.
nice post - ma' salaama
Zogby recently through his/their support behind Obama. Agreed that he could be better, its american politics it always becomes the lesser of two evils.
While there are checks and balances on each branch of the government, the last 8 years have illustrated that the executive branch can do whatever they please because the legislature will sit and do nothing to stop it.
Zogby should go back to Bumfuckistan also. Him and his fake "polls" :O
Excellent first post. Incisive and eloquent.
Really? It seems like basically same thing has been written, again and again, ad nauseum.
This is just the latest.
Whoops - the same thing was just written on about 50 other far-leftist and far-rightist websites.
Damn - there goes another.
Hard to keep up with the "Zionists control everything" meme.
Eloquent and incisive indeed.
The whole idea of John Edwards being the one who's sawing the floor out from under the others - it just shows a ludicrous amount of ignorance on the part of the "artist."
Senator John Edwards' Herzliya speech from just over a year ago:
It’s a great privilege for me to be able to participate in this conference which has played an important role in bringing people together from all walks of life. The Herzliya Conference is a great forum for what is happening in Israel.
I am aware that it was at this conference that PM Ariel Sharon gave his courageous speech outlining his disengagement. He helped Israel face some of its major challenges.
Throughout his career and public service Sharon has shown courage, including his historic decision to evacuate Gaza. More than anyone else, Sharon has, in my judgment, believed that a strong Israel is a safe Israel and that Israel needs to defend itself against security threats.
We also need to remember the three soldiers and their families for whom it is well past time for their return home. They are a symbol of the extraordinary challenges facing Israel and Middle East. One source of strength is the bond between Israel and the United States, which is a bond that will never be broken. For more than half a century both countries have benefited from this alliance. We share common values such as freedom and democracy. I was in Israel in 2001 and I’ll never forget just as I was ending my visit, a Hamas suicide bomber wearing an explosive belt blew up the Sbarro pizzeria. It made an impact on me to see the extraordinary sacrifice made by the Israeli people everyday. They continue to make sacrifices to ensure your security and achieve peace. I saw firsthand the threats you face every day. I feel that I understand on a very personal level those threats. The challenges in your own backyard – rise of Islamic radicalism, use of terrorism, and the spread of nuclear technology and weapons of mass destruction – represent an unprecedented threat to the world and Israel.
At the top of these threats is Iran. Iran threatens the security of Israel and the entire world. Let me be clear: Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons. For years, the US hasn’t done enough to deal with what I have seen as a threat from Iran. As my country stayed on the sidelines, these problems got worse. To a large extent, the US abdicated its responsibility to the Europeans. This was a mistake. The Iranian president’s statements such as his description of the Holocaust as a myth and his goals to wipe Israel off the map indicate that Iran is serious about its threats.
Once Iran goes nuclear, other countries in the Middle East will go nuclear, making Israel’s neighborhood much more volatile.
Iran must know that the world won’t back down. The recent UN resolution ordering Iran to halt the enrichment of uranium was not enough. We need meaningful political and economic sanctions. We have muddled along for far too long. To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep ALL options on the table, Let me reiterate – ALL options must remain on the table.
The war in Lebanon had Iranian fingerprints all over it. I was in Israel in June, and I took a helicopter trip over the Lebanese border. I saw the Hezbollah rockets, and the havoc wreaked by the extremism on Israel’s border. Hezbollah is an instrument of the Iranian government, and Iranian rockets allowed Hezbollah to attack and wage war against Israel.
I cannot talk about the war last summer without referring to the Syrian role in destabilizing area. Syria needs to be held accountable. Syria has recently called for peace talks with Israel. Talk is cheap. Syria needs to go long way to prove it is ready for peace. It can start by not harboring terrorists and ending its nefarious relationship with Iran.
While Iran is the greatest threat now, but just as alarming is the one on your doorstep. Hamas, with Iranian support, doesn’t make any mistake of its intentions to wipe out Israel, and repeatedly makes calls to raise the banner of Allah over all of Israel. Israel made many concessions. Many settlers gave up there land in order to advance peace.
Israel can take more steps to advance peace like bolstering Abbas against Hamas. While Israel is willing to go back to negotiating table, little has been seen on the Palestinian side. We instead have seen chaos and violence on the street, and no revocation of violence against Israel.
Outside assistance to Palestinian governance is not an entitlement. The US and Europe need to ensure that money going to the Palestinians does not go to lining the pockets of terrorists. For peace, Israel needs a partner.
Absent this partnership, Israel not only has the right to defend itself, it has an obligation to defend itself. This means continuing to ensure Israel’s military strength, diplomatically and economically. The hurdles are clear.
For too long, the current US administration’s commitment to this issue has been halfhearted. Now, on the backdrop of Iraq, they have tried to bring the two sides together. This is especially significant since they have squandered America’s moral authority in the Middle East and around the world.
We should be finding ways to upgrade Israel’s relationship with NATO. This could even some day mean membership. NATO’s mission now goes far beyond just Europe. Therefore, it is only natural that NATO seeks to include Israel.
Your challenges are our challenges. Your future is our future. The US will continue to stand by you. God bless you.
Question and Answer:
Cheryl Fishbein from NY: When you do learning of Jewish texts, you give credit to ideas of scholars who have helped you ask questions, I would like to give credit to my friends and colleagues who have had this same overriding question of shared a existential threat: Would you be prepared, if diplomacy failed, to take further action against Iran? I think there is cynicism about the ability of diplomacy to work in this situation. Secondly, you as grassroots person, who has an understanding of the American people, is there understanding of this threat across US?
A: My analysis of Iran is if you start with the President of Iran coming to the UN in New York denouncing America and his extraordinary and nasty statements about the Holocaust and goal of wiping Israel off map, married with his attempts to obtain nuclear weapons over a long period of time, they are buying time. They are the foremost state sponsors of terrorism. If they have nuclear weapons, other states in the area will want them, and this is unacceptable.
As to what to do, we should not take anything off the table. More serious sanctions need to be undertaken, which cannot happen unless Russia and China are seriously on board, which has not happened up until now. I would not want to say in advance what we would do, and what I would do as president, but there are other steps that need to be taken. Fore example, we need to support direct engagement with Iranians, we need to be tough. But I think it is a mistake strategically to avoid engagement with Iran.
As to the American people, this is a difficult question. The vast majority of people are concerned about what is going on in Iraq. This will make the American people reticent toward going for Iran. But I think the American people are smart if they are told the truth, and if they trust their president. So Americans can be educated to come along with what needs to be done with Iran.
#
I know Kabobfest claims to be an "unedited" forum, but do you really need to indulge windy puddles of pig semen like the poster above and their unending, unchallenging boilerplate? If I cut 'n paste the entire Quran or Bible, will you feel obliged to publish it? His or her post was entirely tangential and unresponsive to the original piece. Basta!
Regarding the original piece, I'll say it again; progressives who get on board the Obama train are going to very surprised to find its final destination will be very different from what they expected.
The ridiculous trope that Obama's simply got to parrot the disgusting things he's said about Palestine in order to get elected, and that once he gets to the White House he'll whip off the IDF uniform to reveal the stunning kaffiyeh underneath is pure fantasy. You may recall earnest progs saying the identical thing about Bill Clinton-"he's just electrocuting retarded prisoners in order to get elected. Once in, he'll be able to be himself." That got us far-NAFTA, welfare "reform", hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed, robust and enthusiastic cover for Israeli expansionism, etc, etc.
Just as Nixon's conservatism gave him cover to open talks with China, just as Clinton's liberalism gave him cover to push NAFTA/WTO and similar horrors though Congress (something neither Reagan nor Bush One could do), so will Obama follow suit while his starry-eyed enthusiasts fumble for an explanation of his perfidy. You may find a piece by Matt Gonzalez on Counterpunch.org very instructive in this regard. Gonzalez reveals Obama's highly unsavory record of catering to moneyed interests at the expense of the common people he insists matter to him. Wake the fuck up.
That said, I entirely agree that the highest priority for US Arabs is to establish a transcultural and effective lobbying organization. This will be no picnic for such a diverse bunch as we are, where significant feuds may develop over whether or not to put cumin in the hummus.
Who has ideas re how to begin? Do we await a G.A. Nasser to unite us? How do we get recent Muslim arrivals from Yemen to make common cause with 3rd generation Lebanese Christians? How do we get together and speak as Arabs? (excluding, of course, those fucking Halabis and their cumin).
Ismail said...
That said, I entirely agree that the highest priority for US Arabs is to establish a transcultural and effective lobbying organization. This will be no picnic for such a diverse bunch as we are, where significant feuds may develop over whether or not to put cumin in the hummus.
lolol. I agree with you here.
I would point out, however, regarding what you said about progressives and their expectations of obama, that they are not so much expecting the ideal outcome that his detractors are warning them against.
they (myself included) are making a judgment that this man could be, has a chance - by all accounts of his record, positions, character and discourse - to be a far better leader than any other contenders on the scene presently and make smarter decisions in running this country with regard to many areas, including foreign policy, than we've seen in man a year. that's all. I don't hear the sort of naive idealism coming from the obama camp that its detractors are so cynically and smugly warning against. and I know that no problem will harder to solve than the israel-palestine issue.
all I am saying is that there have been some hopeful signs there could be some progress.
def no cumin in the hummus.
"by all accounts of his record, positions, character and discourse...."
Please read the Matt Gonzalez piece at Counterpunch.org that I suggested, alfannaan, then get back to me about your admiration for Obama's record. If you have access to the print edition, there's a longer piece detailing his sadly consistent tendency to fold when the chips are down.
On the hummus question, though, you da man.
ya ismail - thanks for directing me to the piece. I will try and get to it in the next couple of days and hit you back. though an obama supporter I welcome critical information, as one ought to when checking out any new purchase - lol, and there has not been a lot out there.
after checking in on several threads I just feel happy to have an exchange with someone who isn't lobbing rockets or dropping bombs!
and you better know my hummus is da bomb though - peace.
...and peace to you, brother alfannaan.
Post a Comment