Rosner's Blog Shmuel Rosner Chief U.S. Correspondent www.haaretz.com/rosner
Posted: January 24, 2008
Ambassador vs. Ambassador: Is Obama good for Israel?
The debate surrounding Barack Obama's attitudes toward Israel refuses to calm down. On Wednesday, Obama sent a letter to the U.S. ambassador to the UN, calling upon him to make sure that any Security Council decision dealing with the events in Gaza will not be biased against Israel. But this did not yet convince all the doubters, Jewish and Israeli. Obama also has quite a few supporters in the Jewish community, but those opposing him are fairly vocal, and seem to be even more so as the campaign progresses.
A couple of weeks ago, the Israeli tabloid Maariv ran a leading headline claiming that Israeli officials do not want Obama to be elected. They don't think he will be good for Israel. The sources were anonymous, and the content not very convincing. This week, however, one senior Israeli official - or to be more precise, former official - has decided to go on the record with his doubts. The former Israeli ambassador to Washington, Danny Ayalon (currently co- chairman of Nefesh B'Nefesh), wrote that "we should look at the Obama candidacy with some degree of concern."
For a former ambassador, and one that was here not long ago - a year or so - raising questions about an American candidate is not a small thing. But Ayalon is not shy about airing his concerns. In an article he wrote for the Jerusalem Post under the headline "Who are you, Barack Obama?", the former envoy writes: "Since early on in his campaign, he has said that he would meet with the President of Iran - but we are left in the dark as to what agenda he would pursue on this issue. With the exception of promoting American divestment from Iran, an idea he adopted during a meeting with Bibi Netanyahu, Obama has largely avoided highlighting what specific demands he would make of Ahmadinejad and any timetables he would establish for the Iranians to dismantle their nuclear program."
Ayalon mentions the number of times he has met with the senator (two). "I was left with the impression that he was not entirely forthright with his thinking," he writes. If the Obama campaign was upset over this article, it is more than understandable (Ayalon did not return my call). If the Israeli government is unhappy, it is even more so.
So much so that even the overtly polite diplomatic language is not vague enough as to dampen the anger of the current ambassador to Washington, Salai Meridor, the man who now needs to deal with the fallout. Asked about Ayalon's article, he didn't want to name names or deal specifically with his article. But he did say this:
"Israel is following the US presidential elections with great interest and has no intention of interfering in the course of these elections."
And here comes the good part: "Opinions to the contrary articulated by private Israeli citizens, including former officials, do not represent in any way the policy of the Government of Israel."
Meridor said that "Israel is privileged to enjoy wide and deep support in all walks of American life and among the people of the United States. Israel will continue to nurture this unique and robust bipartisan spirit in its relations with all of the leading candidates."