Obama and McCain: Jerusalem and Israel
Friends of Israel are deeply involved in the Presidential campaign to elect a friend of Israel as President of the United States. This campaign involves a battle over the so-called Jewish vote but also involves voters who believe that Israel is part of the international confrontation between radical Islam and the West.
There are Friends of Israel in two opposing camps.
One camp feels that the road to peace with radical Islam lies with an Israel that is willing to talk and make painful concessions of land (including Jerusalem) to Islamic forces.
The other camp maintains that Israel needs to reassert its commitment to fight (if need be) its enemies because that is what it takes to protect the Jewish State.
For both camps Jerusalem is ground zero. The negotiators camp argues that Israel must give up parts of Jerusalem to bring peace, the other camp argues that giving up even a portion of Jerusalem will encourage radical Islamic forces to continue their push for the annihilation of the State of Israel.
In September, it became clear that the Obama campaign had representatives of both camps under its roof.
Obama declared in a speech before AIPAC ( the large pro-Israel lobbying organization) that if he is elected he would not support the division of Jerusalem. Shortly after this declaration he clarified his position. In other words Jerusalem could be divided.
McCain has not expressed his views as dramatically on this issue. McCain did support legislation to move the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and has steadfastly supported Israel in its requests for military armaments to defend the country.
Obama has not been in the Senate long enough to have a record on this or on any other issues (Its hard to believe he has been a Senator for less than three years) but his campaign has indicated that it will dramatically reduce overall military spending which could impact on America's ability to supply Israel with necessary military hardware.
Obama has won the support of some prominent supporters of Israel. Most recently, Alan Dershowitz.
McCain has also gained the support of prominent defenders of Israel. Charles Krauthammer presents the pro-McCain case here.
Along with these set of issues, friends of Israel should be concerned about the McCain-Obama differences on policy toward Iran.
Obama has famously declared he will participate in talks with Iran without any preconditions. While he has somewhat modified this position he maintains that direct talks with Israel's enemy, that has sworn to wipe it off the face of the earth, is the road to peace.
McCain has branded this approach naive and misguided. Some McCain supporters have likened the Obama approach to British Prime Minister Chamberlain who held talks with Hitler instead of actively opposing him. History has concluded that the Chamberlain approach contributed to the start of World War II.
While McCain's advisers have not caused any controversy, Obama's associations have raised questions about who is influencing his foreign policy. Obama has had associations with (in the words of an Obama supporter) the"rabidly anti-Israel Palestinian academic" Rashid Khalidi, the anti-semitic Jeremiah Wright, and academic critics of Israel.
Who would help protect Israel and the United States? You will have the opportunity to decide this Tuesday.
Neither, one man would have but seems no one wants a good honest G-d fearing man.