Obama on Israel & Gaza

Obama's first substantive remarks on Israel, at State Department, follow:

Let me be clear: America is committed to Israel’s security. And we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself against legitimate threats.

For years, Hamas has launched thousands of rockets at innocent Israeli citizens. No democracy can tolerate such danger to its people, nor should the international community, and neither should the Palestinian people themselves, whose interests are only set back by acts of terror.

To be a genuine party to peace, the Quartet has made it clear that Hamas must meet clear conditions: recognize Israel’s right to exist, renounce violence, and abide by past agreements. Going forward, the outline for a durable ceasefire is clear: Hamas must end its rocket fire; Israel will complete the withdrawal of its forces from Gaza; the United States and our partners will support a credible anti-smuggling and interdiction regime, so that Hamas cannot rearm.

Comment:

“America is committed to Israel’s security.” Obama does not recognize the right of Palestinians to security?

“Israel’s right to defend itself against legitimate threats.” Israel illegally occupies Gaza in defiance of a U.N. resolution, so it is Hamas that is defending itself.

“Hamas must…recognize Israel’s right to exist, renounce violence, and abide by past agreements.” Fine, but why should Hamas recognize Israel’s right to exist if Israel does not have to recognize Hamas’ right to exist. After all, Hamas won the only free election Palestine ever had (in 2006). If Hamas should renounce violence, why should Israel not also do so? If Hamas should abide by past agreements, why should Israel not also do so? After all, it was Israel that violated the summer 2008 ceasefire by not substantially reducing its economic embargo against the people of Gaza.

“the outline for a durable ceasefire is clear: Hamas must end its rocket fire; Israel will complete the withdrawal of its forces from Gaza” This is in no way balanced: were Israel in fact to complete its withdrawal in a meaningful sense, then Gaza would be free. But, no, the implication here is that the situation will return to that of December, when Israel was illegally controlling Gaza by controlling its borders. Obama is saying that Hamas must submit to being in jail and to seeing all the people of Gaza stay in jail, while Israel is to be allowed to continue its illegal occupation of Gaza. This is the outline for endless violence.

“Hamas cannot rearm” Hamas is the governing organization of Gaza. It has as much right to rearm as any other government.

Whatever Obama may be thinking or planning, his comments were a whitewash of Israel and an utter distortion of history. Perhaps he was just reading what his pro-Israeli appointees fed him, perhaps he has other plans he calculates he must keep to himself for now, perhaps he has calculated that he has bigger fights than justice in the Levant.

Obama was not elected to help Palestinians, so perhaps he has the moral right to turn his back on them. The problem is that so long as he continues U.S. military and economic aid to Israel, everything Israel does is Obama's responsibility. He is not an innocent bystander.