Obama Pandering Watch: We 'Should Never Fear to Negotiate' - Except With Hamas
| Tue Mar. 4, 2008 9:33 AM PST
One of the fundamentals of Barack Obama's foreign policy pitch—and one of those rare areas of real disagreement between him and Hillary—is that he is willing to meet with the leaders of all nations. As his Web site puts it, "[Obama] will do the careful preparation necessary, but will signal that America is ready to come to the table, and that he is willing to lead." On this position, which he applies to even such official boogeymen as Raul Castro and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Obama likes to quote JFK's line that "We should never negotiate out of fear, but we should never fear to negotiate."
That Obama has vigorously defended his pro-negotiations posture, even in the face of criticism that will no doubt intensify if he is the nominee, makes the senator's response to a question about whether he favors negotiations with Hamas particularly striking. From an event for Jewish leaders in Cleveland last week:
Continues Below
Continued From Above
The answer is no and the distinction would be that Hamas is represented in the Palestinian legislature, or it was before the current rift, but they're not the head of state. They are not a recognized government. So I think there is a distinction to be drawn there and a legitimate distinction to be drawn. …[A]nd the point is that with respect to Hamas, you can't have a conversation with somebody who doesn't think you should be on the other side of the table. At the point where they recognize Israel and its right to exist, at the point where they recognize that they are not going to be able to shove their worldview down the throats of others but are going to have to sit down and negotiate without resort to violence, then I think that will be a different circumstance.
Of course Obama's answer disregards, among other things, the fact that Hamas is not a recognized government in part because of a boycott by the United States (despite Hamas' clear majority in the 2006 parliamentary elections and current control of Gaza). There are also the repeated offers by Hamas for a cease-fire with Israel. The answer represents a clear departure from Obama's credo of talking to anyone, friend or foe—Hamas is somehow beyond the pale, while an Ahmadinejad or a Castro is acceptable.Tellingly, as Laura reported earlier, there is growing support in Israeli officialdom for some form of negotiation with Hamas. And then there's this: Haaretz released a poll last week showing that 64 percent of Israelis favor direct negotiations with Hamas. So why is the most liberal presidential candidate in America taking a harder line than the Israeli citizenry? Nothing new here, just a continuation of Obama's Israel shuffle.—Justin ElliottPhoto by Flickr user BohPhoto used under a Creative Commons license.
Comments
In the recent French elections, the losing candidate was ostracized for her conviction that EVERYONE must be around the table if a lasting peace is to be negotiated. The Israelis seemed to agree with her but the French candidate running against her used her open-mindedness against her as leverage with French Jewish voters. In the end, it's the American Jews rather than the Israelis who vote.
Hamas is NOT the legitimate government because the Palestinian-Arab constitution states that the President (currently Abbas) holds an absolute veto and can disolve the government, which he attempted to do when he was deposed from Gaza by Hamas.
The Palestinain-Arabs biggest (real) enemy is their own propaganda, false history and equally fabled future.
The only way that talking with them will accomplish anything (for Obama or the Israelis) is if someone brings a history book to the meeting. That is NOT likely to happen. When ever Chairman Arafat was confronted with a dose of factual-truth, he would turn red and irate, fumpher and humph, change the subject and often, storm out of the discussion.
Submitted by addy (not verified) on Thu Mar. 20, 2008 7:08 AM PDT.
Of course, you don't need to talk to them, just reprint their manifesto in your church bulletin, like Obama's church did...
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/obamacide-obamas-church-r...
Sorry, but I don't buy the pander charge here. Israeli polls notwithstanding, there is no long term "negotiation" possibility with Hamas and any western nation re: Gaza. They make their position extremely clear. Although there may be room for short-term tactical agreements such as the tentative agreement to stop the bombing of Israeli civilians, their long term strategy is to train future generations of Palenstinians to hate and kill. They've got power over Gaza and they're not moving. Obama may be on the money in letting other parties, like Egypt, do the direct negotiations, which is what Rice is counting on to head off future attacks into Israeli territory.
