The good news is that Obama’s mild demurral re Israel and the panic over the Arab spring means that prominent American Republicans and Democrats are finally going to talk about Israel openly. And Americans may get to differ?
First, the Republican Party: Ron Kampeas reports in the JTA:
the single foreign policy reference in Pawlenty’s statement [endorsing Romney]. My bold:
Abroad, the standing of the United States appears uncertain and adrift under the failed leadership of a president who prefers chastising allies to condemning foes.
…to the degree foreign policy will play a role, it looks like Republicans — the entire party — will hinge their attack on President Obama’s differences with Israel.
Second, the Democratic Party: Liberal Richard Cohen of the Washington Post:
But the United States has the moral obligation to stick by the sometimes obstreperous democracy it felt morally obligated to embrace. The Obama administration has to show no daylight between it and Israel — never mind that Benjamin Netanyahu is no Ben-Gurion.
The no-daylight line is from AIPAC. Note that Cohen’s whole column is based on the idea that the Arab spring is a great step backward. But the peoples overwhelmingly approve the Arab spring. This shows how ethnocentric the Israel lobby is: It will rationalize any people’s oppression so long as Israel is maintained as a Jewish state. Is it worth it? When American Jews live so freely in a plural democracy? Isn’t that the way, Richard?
