Another Kind of President: The Israeli Stance toward Obama
Published in Maariv
(Israel) on 23 May 2011
by Yariv Oppenheimer (link to original)
Obama's speech would not receive such outpourings of criticism and hurls of public offenses from Netanyahu had the speaker been a rich, white American president.
Disagreements between the U.S. president and the Israeli government are not a new thing; the exchange of mutual acrimonies and the delivery of contradictory speeches are both a part of the scene in political and diplomatic fights.
However, Netanyahu's bearing in the White House last weekend has no precedent. It springs not only from ideological antagonisms, but also from a feeling of superiority and arrogance that raised its head and revealed itself at the height of its ugliness at the moment when Netanyahu decided to reproach the American president in front of the eyes of the world.
While still on the flight to Washington, Netanyahu, who is well acquainted with diplomatic protocol and the need to avoid rehashing legitimate contentions in public, opted to break the rules and deal with the American president as if he were just a junior member in the Kadima* Council.
It is not accidental that Israeli impertinence and chutzpah have broken records and that words meant to be said in private meetings and internal discussions were spoken outside in a conceited and unseemly way.
The degrading and condescending attitude bestowed upon the first black American president in U.S. history is the consequence of the outlook that Obama is not a “part of the family" or the social milieu to which American presidents of the past belonged, including Bush, Reagan, Clinton and their predecessors.
No One Dared to Go Overtly Against Clinton
When George Bush Senior allocated loan guarantees to the state of Israel on the condition that construction be stopped in the settlements, nobody within the government or the Jewish community in the United States cried out or preached that then President Bush was hostile to the state of Israel.
When Clinton clashed head-on with Netanyahu during his first term, no one in Jerusalem dared to openly come out against the White House. Nevertheless, when current President Barack Obama stood up and reiterated proposals that were incredibly similar to the Clinton outlines regarding the future borders between the two countries, the prime minister completely lost his cool and did his best to humiliate and hurt his U.S. counterpart.
In conservative Jewish factions in the United States, one can identify a haughty and snobbish disposition toward the American president as well. Jewish tycoons allow themselves to threaten him due to their conservative and reactionary vantage points, seeing Obama as an outsider in American politics. Highlighting President Obama’s middle name, Hussein, is not casual either and serves the intimidation campaign that conservatives have been running against him.
The White House Stood by Israel's Side
Obama's critics in Israel are forgetting that despite his determination to achieve an agreement between Israel and its neighbors, Obama has proved not once, but many times, that he is committed to the security and future of Israel more than every American president before him.
With Obama's support, the aid budget for Israel was increased and was the highest ever. In addition, he authorized the transfer of $205 million for the Iron Dome [counter-rocket defense] system, and he has even given assistance to Israel in the aftermath of the fires in Carmel.
Recently, the White House has stood alone beside Israel in the U.N., while Arab and European countries have either abstained or supported the proposal of a resolution against the country. In his Middle East speech as well, Obama openly stepped out against Hamas and publicly opposed the expected unilateral Palestinian request to the U.N.
No other American president, having come from a more traditional background for White House leaders, would be treated with the same animosity, suspicion and disdain from the conservative right wingers in Israel and the United States.
Obama's latest address would not be subject to the outpouring of criticism and hurling of private and widespread offenses were the speaker a rich, white American president. Netanyahu's harsh behavior and his unprecedented personal conduct prove that in Israeli eyes, Obama is not judged only by his deeds, but also by his origins, his past and the background from which he came.
*Translator's Note: Second largest political party in Israel, which stands in opposition to Netanyahu's party, Likud.
Disagreements between the U.S. president and the Israeli government are not a new thing; the exchange of mutual acrimonies and the delivery of contradictory speeches are both a part of the scene in political and diplomatic fights.
However, Netanyahu's bearing in the White House last weekend has no precedent. It springs not only from ideological antagonisms, but also from a feeling of superiority and arrogance that raised its head and revealed itself at the height of its ugliness at the moment when Netanyahu decided to reproach the American president in front of the eyes of the world.
While still on the flight to Washington, Netanyahu, who is well acquainted with diplomatic protocol and the need to avoid rehashing legitimate contentions in public, opted to break the rules and deal with the American president as if he were just a junior member in the Kadima* Council.
It is not accidental that Israeli impertinence and chutzpah have broken records and that words meant to be said in private meetings and internal discussions were spoken outside in a conceited and unseemly way.
The degrading and condescending attitude bestowed upon the first black American president in U.S. history is the consequence of the outlook that Obama is not a “part of the family" or the social milieu to which American presidents of the past belonged, including Bush, Reagan, Clinton and their predecessors.
No One Dared to Go Overtly Against Clinton
When George Bush Senior allocated loan guarantees to the state of Israel on the condition that construction be stopped in the settlements, nobody within the government or the Jewish community in the United States cried out or preached that then President Bush was hostile to the state of Israel.
When Clinton clashed head-on with Netanyahu during his first term, no one in Jerusalem dared to openly come out against the White House. Nevertheless, when current President Barack Obama stood up and reiterated proposals that were incredibly similar to the Clinton outlines regarding the future borders between the two countries, the prime minister completely lost his cool and did his best to humiliate and hurt his U.S. counterpart.
In conservative Jewish factions in the United States, one can identify a haughty and snobbish disposition toward the American president as well. Jewish tycoons allow themselves to threaten him due to their conservative and reactionary vantage points, seeing Obama as an outsider in American politics. Highlighting President Obama’s middle name, Hussein, is not casual either and serves the intimidation campaign that conservatives have been running against him.
The White House Stood by Israel's Side
Obama's critics in Israel are forgetting that despite his determination to achieve an agreement between Israel and its neighbors, Obama has proved not once, but many times, that he is committed to the security and future of Israel more than every American president before him.
With Obama's support, the aid budget for Israel was increased and was the highest ever. In addition, he authorized the transfer of $205 million for the Iron Dome [counter-rocket defense] system, and he has even given assistance to Israel in the aftermath of the fires in Carmel.
Recently, the White House has stood alone beside Israel in the U.N., while Arab and European countries have either abstained or supported the proposal of a resolution against the country. In his Middle East speech as well, Obama openly stepped out against Hamas and publicly opposed the expected unilateral Palestinian request to the U.N.
No other American president, having come from a more traditional background for White House leaders, would be treated with the same animosity, suspicion and disdain from the conservative right wingers in Israel and the United States.
Obama's latest address would not be subject to the outpouring of criticism and hurling of private and widespread offenses were the speaker a rich, white American president. Netanyahu's harsh behavior and his unprecedented personal conduct prove that in Israeli eyes, Obama is not judged only by his deeds, but also by his origins, his past and the background from which he came.
*Translator's Note: Second largest political party in Israel, which stands in opposition to Netanyahu's party, Likud.