Obama Reconsidered: An Israeli View

by Gerald M. Steinberg
Special To The Jewish Week

Presidential election campaigns in the United States are always closely watched in Israel, and this is particularly the case in 2008. The conventional wisdom is that Barack Obama, like Jimmy Carter, is inexperienced and naïve, and that he has been influenced by radical Palestinian friends like Rashid Khalidi (the Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University), anti-Israel advisors like Samantha Power and Zbigniew Brezinski, and by his ex-pastor, Jeremiah Wright, a supporter of Louis Farrakhan. In contrast, John McCain is viewed as a realist who understands the complexities of the Middle East, including Iran’s efforts to dominate the region through nuclear weapons, and is prepared to respond effectively.

But Obama, visiting Israel this week, has provided some reasons to re-examine this image,

while also introducing a new and important factor that works in his favor.
Like others around the world, Israelis have observed and been impacted by the decline of American power in recent years. Intense internal divisions (red vs. blue states) within the United States and President Bush’s stumbling performance severely undermined Washington’s credibility and influence, from Venezuela to Pakistan.

Major mistakes by the U.S. in Iraq allowed the Iranian regime to become a leading force in the Middle East, and the promotion of instant democracy legitimized Hamas and weakened the military elite that provides stability in Egypt. Power projection resulting from economic success has disintegrated as the dollar and Wall Street plummeted, and American-led alliances have failed to defeat al Qaeda or the Taliban. The perception of the U.S. as a weakened and fading world power has also emboldened Israel’s enemies.

To restore American power and, in its wake, Israeli security and Middle East stability, the next president must first unify the American public, and inspire it to take the steps necessary to repair its economy, including reducing the huge gap between rich and poor and improving education. A president who projects confidence, intelligence and empathy can lead a long-overdue transformation, and here Obama has the advantage.
History has shown that these steps will also have a major impact in improving America’s ability to act effectively around the world. In 1961, John F. Kennedy’s stirring speeches projected a confident superpower, sure of its moral mandate and ready to “bear any burden” to defend the cause of freedom. In practice, the inexperience of Kennedy and his advisors led to serious policy challenges, including the 1962 nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union, but America emerged as the undisputed leader and inspiration for citizens of many other countries.

The Vietnam War, the darkness of the Nixon years, and Jimmy Carter’s “malaise” undermined this power, but in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan’s clear message and actions restored America’s position as the world leader, and sped the demise of the Soviet empire. The economy boomed and further increased Washington’s power. As the close ally of the U.S., Israel also benefited from this recovery.

On this score, Obama’s energy and racial background can unite and inspire Americans, and his election would revive the glow of American democracy around the world. His speeches and Q&A responses display a quick intelligence and a sharp wit, and his body language is consistent with the words. In this context, Obama has written about his admiration for Reagan — the quintessential Republican and neoconservative.
However, to convince Israelis, the Democratic candidate must also demonstrate that he can make the difficult calls, including the use of force, when required. Obama’s comments on Iraq, including a pledge to end the war, come across as simplistic, as did his confused statements on the very complex issue of Jerusalem. In his visit to the region, Israelis are looking for signs of something beyond inspirational speeches and self-confidence; they are looking for signs that Obama can also deal with the threats on the ground.

In contrast, McCain’s policies, including threats to use America’s military power to defend freedom, are more credible than Obama’s, and his record is consistent and substantive. On Iraq, as on many other difficult issues, McCain does not present thin hopes of a quick solution that will allow America to disengage and leave a stable government.

But McCain’s personality and rhetoric do not inspire, and he will be seen by many both inside the U.S. and overseas as a continuation of the Bush era.
These dimensions, taken together, make for a difficult choice for Americans, while Israelis watch with more than usual interest. If the result produces a stronger America, this should also benefit other democracies around the world, including Israel. n

Gerald M. Steinberg is executive director of NGO Monitor in Jerusalem, and chairs the political science department at Bar Ilan University, in Israel.

Westchester Jewish Conference

Westchester’s Jewish Community Relations Organization