With all the drama going on about Obama, McCain and Lieberman after the recent AIPAC conference, an extremely disturbing event has almost passed unnoticed: Obama stated that he opposed dividing Jerusalem in the context of a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians.
I have been a supporter of Senator Obama's candidacy for a long time now. I volunteered for his campaign in New Hampshire and now I'm volunteering in D.C. You can understand then how appalled I was when I read this.
Anyone who knows even the basics of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and peace process understands that an undivided Jerusalem and peace between Israelis and Palestinians are mutually exclusive.
This should be extremely troubling to every progressive who considers himself a supporter of peace in the Middle East and especially for those of us who have supported and worked for Senator Obama's candidacy.
Now, there are different scenarios I'm willing to consider here:
Obama has been considered one of the most pro-Palestinian American politicians. He has been harshly criticized by right-wing pro-Israel entities like AIPAC for his comments on Israel-Palestine, having Robert Malley as his advisor, the apparent endorsement of a Hamas member and his overall non-insane position on the conflict. This has in turn led to the development of a very negative image of Senator Obama within the Jewish community (which he made reference to in the beginning of his speech).
Thus, in light of this political problem, since Jewish voters are a significant component of the Democratic Party's financial and electoral base, Obama ended-up "over-compensating" by offering an extremely conservative stance. So, either he was actually being dishonest and presenting a view that is not consistent with his actual position, which I doubt, or a speech writer made a terrible mistake and went over the top, which I think is more probable.
The latter scenario (that this is basically a simple gaffe and not an accurate representation of Obama's position on Jerusalem) is one I can live with comfortably, especially if Obama is willing to correct it publicly in the near future.
The other scenario of course is that Obama has actually changed his mind and now truly believes that the U.S should advocate for Jerusalem remaining undivided. I find this almost impossible to believe, not only because it is a brutally unreasonable position, but also because it is an extremely reactionary one which not even the Bush Administration has been willing to support. However, if this inexplicable change of heart is actually sincere, then this is a terrible and enormous blow to the possibility of peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
I support Senator Obama for many different reasons and I will continue to do so until he is inaugurated, but if his campaign does not issue a public correction of this statement, this will profoundly dampen the enthusiasm with which I do so. We must remember that we support Obama not because of who he is, but because of what he stands for: Change, Hope, a brighter future. My people have been dying and suffering in the death trap of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for too long now. A commitment by the U.S to an undivided Jerusalem is a death sentence to the next generations of Israelis and Palestinians who will continue to be slaughtered in this senseless tragedy.
I like Obama a lot, but I like peace and justice more, and so should every other progressive. If this was a mistake, it is vital that we let Obama's campaign know of our concern, and if it wasn't, it is as vital that we let them know of our disapproval.
Salam
Shalom
Peace