Here’s a flip-flop worth applauding. President Obama looks to be dropping his failed hard-line policy toward Israel and is moving closer to the position he inherited from President Bush.
Some Jewish leaders believe Obama realizes it was a mistake to put pressure for peace only on Israel and let Palestinians off the hook. They also say he has renounced the idea of imposing a settlement and concedes the parties must make their own peace.
“There are signs he has reverted to the traditional position, that America would propose a plan, but not impose one,” said Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman and CEO of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.
He cited a letter from Obama to his organization where the president stressed his “unshakable” commitment to Israel’s security and said peace “must be negotiated directly” by Israel and the Palestinians.
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel made the same points in a TV interview and National Security Adviser James Jones used almost identical language in a speech.
Former Mayor Ed Koch, who has been critical of Obama, is optimistic. “I think that letter brings US policy back to where it was,” he said, though he added that his trust in Obama “is like Humpty Dumpty, it can never be what it was.”
Jewish members of Congress are expected to meet with Obama this week. Most are Democrats.
The White House maintains it is trying to correct only a “perception” that Obama was too tough on Israel. It says there is no substantive change in policy.
I don’t buy the White House spin. Then again, I’m not sure it has a coherent plan.
Its policy hit a dead end and was backfiring at home, with top Democrats growing increasingly critical. It has to change for both substantive and political reasons.
The humiliating treatment Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton dished out to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu created a backlash among many Jewish Americans, who gave more than 75 percent of their votes to Obama.
Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, among others, pleaded for better relations. One poll had only 10 percent of Israelis viewing Obama as a friend.
More important, there is a sense another Mideast war is more likely as a result of Obama’s one-sided pressure. In power calculations, weakened American support encourages aggression among Muslims, most of whom harbor the fantasy of eliminating Israel.
Much of the blame is aimed at Clinton. Koch said she “betrayed” her earlier support for Israel. Sen. Chuck Schumer told me Obama’s policy is “counterproductive” and said Clinton made a mistake reaming out Netanyahu.
No doubt Clinton accepted her task too enthusiastically, but the policy stinks from the head. Obama wants to woo Muslims and blasting Israel is central to the plan.
Even if that is changing, there are still major unknowns, especially America’s bottom line about Iranian nukes. Jones said the United States “is determined to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons,” a point Vice President Joe Biden stressed in Israel.
Yet Obama has not said that and he has failed to convince China and Russia to back even modest sanctions. There is suspicion Obama will let Iran’s mad mullahs get their nukes, then play defense.
Also troubling is Jones’ foolish linking of Iran to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, saying peace “would take such an evocative issue away from Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas.”
The concept is faculty-lounge nonsense. It gives Iran and its terror proxies a legitimacy they don’t deserve by suggesting they have rational reasons for their murderous ways. If America buys the idea, it ends up blaming the victim for terrorism.
Koch has contempt for the linkage: “If the Israelis and the Palestinians played kissy-kissy tomorrow, Muslims would still go on killing Muslims, as they have for 1,400 years.”
The day Obama comes to that realization is the day his policy has a chance to succeed.
It’s on with the no-show governor
In a recent conversation with a city official, I asked what Gov. Paterson thought about the bank reforms in Congress. “Who cares what he thinks?” came the answer.
The comment struck me as harsh, but undeniably true. And as I watched Paterson during President Obama’s Manhattan speech last week, it was obvious that absolutely nobody cares what Paterson thinks.
It doesn’t seem possible to be both governor and invisible, but Paterson is achieving it. The accidental governor is now a lonely sad sack.
Sitting for an hour before Obama’s speech began, Paterson looked like he didn’t have a friend or a reason to be there. Politically speaking, he didn’t.
Courting him brings no gain, and ignoring him brings no penalty. Try to imagine a conversation with him that doesn’t quickly touch on his legal troubles.
As for what’s going on in Albany, how would he know? On any given day, he seems to be “not talking” to most of the important people in town, including some in his own office.
The rumor that he always wanted a no-show job? He has one.
It is an extraordinary situation. New York is careening toward insolvency, doesn’t have a budget, and yet the governor never manages more than a whimper. With eight months left on his watch, our ship of state has no captain.
Contrast him with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who has seized command of his state’s problems. Even new MTA head Jay Walder is putting Paterson to shame with a forthright attack on the agency’s bloat.
There is an old saying about civil servants who have stopped doing their jobs, but nonetheless expect to be paid. “He’s retired in place,” the saying goes.
I first heard the line years ago about a career sanitation official. I never dreamed it would apply to a governor.
SEE NO EVIL POL
The charge that state Sen. Pedro Espada Jr. looted $14 million of public money raises many interesting questions, the most pressing being this: Didn’t any of his colleagues in Albany wonder where he was getting the dough all those years?
“If you see something, say something,” the MTA tells riders. It’s good advice for the subways, and just as good for Albany.
Prophets of loss
Here’s a shock: A federal report says the health-care package will cost more than President Obama promised. Which just proves that the 70 percent of the public who predicted as much are smarter than their Washington masters. No news there.
Turning a corner
I’ve been driving in the city lately and have modest good news. I actually witnessed a yellow-cab driver use a turn signal. Yes, it’s true he was cutting across three lanes, but it’s reason to hope. Maybe next time I’ll see two cabbies using turn signals. That would be really big news.