In FrontPage tonight I discuss Abraham Foxman’s odd and self-serving spin on Obama’s appeasement speech yesterday:
Seventy-eight percent of American Jews voted for Barack Obama, and in the wake of Obama’s betrayal of Israel, Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League is trying to keep them on the reservation.
One wonders why Foxman even bothers with this dangerous fool’s errand. Obama has associated with antisemites and Palestinian jihad sympathizers throughout his political career, such that the Jews and supporters of Israel who voted for him in 2008 should be in full backpedal mode by now, apologizing for their earlier support for this clear enemy of Israel and dedicating themselves to defeating him in 2012.
But apparently Foxman’s pride is more important to him than the survival of Israel as the Jewish homeland and the sole bulwark of freedom and human rights in the Middle East. And so instead of renouncing his earlier support for Obama and taking a stand for Israel when that embattled country needs it the most, he has opted to pretend that Obama’s statement really wasn’t all that bad, and that Jews and all supporters of Israel should relax and keep on loving Barack Hussein Obama.
“I don’t see this as the president throwing Israel under the bus,” Foxman told Greg Sargent of the Washington Post. “He’s saying with `swaps.” It’s not 1967 borders in the abstract. It’s not an edict. It’s a recommendation of a structure for negotiations.”
Foxman was referring to Obama’s statement that “the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.”
Foxman apparently believes that Obama’s statement about “the 1967 lines” is the core of the problem that those who are appalled by Obama’s speech have with it — thus his emphasis that “it’s not an edict,” but simply a “recommendation.” He added that “there is a danger that the 1967 marker, which was always there but has never been stated so directly, may become this year’s settlements issue.” But, he repeated, “it’s not an edict “” it’s not what he did with settlements.”
In this Foxman overlooked what most mainstream media reports about Obama’s speech also overlooked: that he wasn’t calling for a return to the pre-Six Day War borders at all, but to new borders “based on the 1967 lines,” and creating “two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine.”
This would be even worse for Israel than a return to the 1967 lines. A Palestinian state that bordered on Israel, Jordan and Egypt while Israel bordered only on Palestine would mean a substantially reduced Israel, having been forced to cede much of its core territory to the Palestinian Arabs in exchange for the chimera of peace with what are in fact implacable and unappeasable jihadis. Abraham Foxman should have learned from the disastrous aftermath of Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza that territorial concessions to the Palestinian jihadis do not bring peace and never will bring peace. Instead, Foxman declared Friday that Obama’s speech “indicated to me that this administration has come a long way in better understanding and appreciating the difficulties facing both parties, but especially Israel in trying to make peace with the Palestinians.”
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu disagreed. Meeting with Obama at the White House on Friday, he emphasized that “while Israel is prepared to make generous compromises for peace “¦ it cannot go back to 1967 lines, because these lines are indefensible.” Netanyahu didn’t say it, but clearly he was not going to accept anything worse than the 1967 lines, either….