OPD 9/2 Edited by Laurence Bouvard (proofing TP 9/12)
Israel: An Issue in the American Elections
Published in al-Quds
(Palestine) on 8 September 2012
by (link to original)
(Palestine) on 8 September 2012
by (link to original)
Translated from
by Christopher Marrs.
Edited by .
America’s blind bias towards Israel and its stances have been well known since the fall of the British Empire and the shift of international influence to the U.S. This bias is found in both the Democratic and Republican Parties because election interests dictate their platforms. As long as the Jews have a decisive influence on the elections, every candidate will race to gain their support.
A short while ago, the Republican candidate Mitt Romney visited Israel and demonstrated his blind support for Israel, expressing his hatred and enmity towards our people and our concerns, all in the name of gaining Jewish support. While Romney was in Jerusalem, his Democratic competitor Barack Obama signed an agreement to increase support for the Israeli missile defense shield by $80 million.
In the current presidential race the Democratic Party released an official campaign platform that did not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, which the Republicans then used to attack the Democrats’ lack of support for Israel. The Democrats quickly realized this, and Obama sought to emphasize the fact that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, integrating it into his platform.
Israel has become an internal issue in the American elections because of this political naiveté. From the perspective of the Palestinians and international law, this position is untenable, since Western Jerusalem has been occupied Palestinian land since 1967. Further, the world has not recognized Jerusalem as the capital, and the U.S. itself has stalled efforts to move its embassy to Jerusalem in spite of its recognition of the city as the capital.
This position has undeniably proven that all of the principles, laws, international agreements and values of freedom and justice so often invoked by the candidates are nothing more than empty words. Narrow political interests are what dominate and control the elections, which have given the Jews, despite their small numbers, all of the power and influence. This has also made our Arab nation, despite its numbers, extensive resources and considerable strategic and geographic importance, ineffective and subordinate to these interests.
A short while ago, the Republican candidate Mitt Romney visited Israel and demonstrated his blind support for Israel, expressing his hatred and enmity towards our people and our concerns, all in the name of gaining Jewish support. While Romney was in Jerusalem, his Democratic competitor Barack Obama signed an agreement to increase support for the Israeli missile defense shield by $80 million.
In the current presidential race the Democratic Party released an official campaign platform that did not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, which the Republicans then used to attack the Democrats’ lack of support for Israel. The Democrats quickly realized this, and Obama sought to emphasize the fact that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, integrating it into his platform.
Israel has become an internal issue in the American elections because of this political naiveté. From the perspective of the Palestinians and international law, this position is untenable, since Western Jerusalem has been occupied Palestinian land since 1967. Further, the world has not recognized Jerusalem as the capital, and the U.S. itself has stalled efforts to move its embassy to Jerusalem in spite of its recognition of the city as the capital.
This position has undeniably proven that all of the principles, laws, international agreements and values of freedom and justice so often invoked by the candidates are nothing more than empty words. Narrow political interests are what dominate and control the elections, which have given the Jews, despite their small numbers, all of the power and influence. This has also made our Arab nation, despite its numbers, extensive resources and considerable strategic and geographic importance, ineffective and subordinate to these interests.
Previous article![]( "Another QE Is a Bad Idea for US")
