Alexander Griffing, the Director of Digital Outreach at Haaretz English edition, writes a revealing op-ed urging traditional, interventionist, one might say “neocon” Republicans to vote for Hillary.
First off, she’s "the only candidate in the field to have advanced the decapitation of a dictator" — Bernie doesn’t have that kind of tough foreign policy resume, eh guys?
He goes on to point out:
Of the five major candidates left in the race, only Clinton clings to the decades-old foreign policy dynamic that has pervaded Washington since WWII — classic liberal interventionism.
And on Israel, likely of prime interest to Haaretz readers?
On Israel, Clinton’s positions are similar to that of a typical, let’s say pre-Trump era, Republican. As a U.S. Senator, Clinton supported the separation barrier between Israel and some Palestinian areas, “This is not against the Palestinian people. This is against the terrorists. The Palestinian people have to help to prevent terrorism. They have to change the attitudes about terrorism." Clinton, since leaving the State Department, has said in retrospect the Obama administration’s 2009 settlement freeze (imposed on Netanyahu with some strong-arm tactics) was a tactical mistake, saying peace negotiations cannot have preconditions.
Lovely. Lovely. We’re winding this up for the sales pitch now guys. First off, Hillary isn’t going to be some neutral negotiator like the unserious Donald Trump:
Hillary’s readiness to sit down with both the Israelis and Palestinians mirrors her husband's pro-active approach to the region, as does her closeness to Israeli leadership – something far different from Trump’s recent dust-up with Netanyahu over a potential visit and his desire to remain ‘neutral’ when negotiating.
This is so good. Time to pan out to the big picture and bring this home. Will Hillary start the most wars in the Middle East, for all of us neocons in favor of such a thing?
Given her propensity for intervention and willingness to use American military power for long-term engagements, Hillary’s approach to the Middle East will likely be far more pro-active and involved than that of her main rivals Sanders, Trump or Cruz – all of whom have warned repeatedly against the U.S. getting bogged down again in Middle Eastern strife.
Huzzah! As a GOP neoconservative, I believe I have found my new candidate! Haaretz digital director, do you agree?
Come November, if the choice on the Republican ticket is between the nativist, isolationist foreign policy ramblings of Donald Trump or the watered down version offered by Ted Cruz, many Republicans, especially more moderate Republicans who care about conserving the party’s classic approach to foreign policy in general and Israel in particular, may find themselves overcoming their initial distaste and beginning to feel less unease in Hillary’s foreign policy camp.
Hard to imagine stronger words of praise. Now come on neocons and Israel hawks, let’s get out and vote for Hillary!