ADL: Speech ‘groundbreaking and honest’—but not honest enough
The Anti-Defamation League is calling President Obama's speech "groundbreaking and honest," but feels he also missed some opportunities to put the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in proper historical context for the Muslim world.
The group praised Obama in a statement for broaching issues that had never really been addressed to the Arab world before now, but said he did not go quite far enough.
For example, "while he made strong statements against anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial, it should have been made clear that Israel's right to statehood is not a result of anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. We are disappointed that the President found the need to balance the suffering of the Jewish people in a genocide to the suffering of the Palestinian people resulting from Arab wars."
He also failed to point out that "six Arab nations attacked Israel from day one and the occupation of Palestinian land was a product of Israel's wars of self-defense."
In an interview with JTA, Foxman emphasized that while Israel has "roots in the tragic history" of the Jewish people, it is also rooted in the "aspiration of the Jewish people to be like any other people and have a right to a homeland" -- something the president didn't talk about.
That's particularly important in the Muslim world, he noted, because of the mythology in the region that they are "paying the price" for the Holocaust.
"It was a good speech, good-intentioned," said Foxman. "He wants to do the right thing, wants to change the environment but there's disappointment he didn't go the whole way. You have to tell the whole truth."
Foxman added that he was not happy with the Iran portion of the speech. "It was very weak," he said, noting that the words "we will not accept a nuclear Iran" were not heard.
The ADL's statement concluded, "We are willing to give the President's approach a chance to work and we are waiting to hear a response from the moderate Arab states. It will be interesting to see how the Muslim world reacts to the speech."
The ADL's full statement is after the jump:
ADL: OBAMA'S SPEECH TO MUSLIM WORLD IS 'GROUNDBREAKING,' BUT MISSES OPPORTUNITIES ON THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today reacted to President Barack Obama’s speech to the Arab world in Cairo, calling it "groundbreaking and honest" in speaking to the Muslim people. However, the League said the President missed an opportunity to put into historical context the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and expressed concern about how his message ultimately would be received across the Muslim world.
Glen S. Lewy, ADL National Chair, and Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director issued the following statement:
President Obama's speech to the Muslim world in Cairo was groundbreaking and honest, touching on many important issues -- human rights, education, democracy, the need to deal with Islamic extremists -- with candor. He issued a clarion call for recalibrating America's relationship with the Muslim world through constructive
outreach and dialogue. Speaking directly to the Muslim people, he broached issues that have never really been addressed to the Arab world before now. We share the President's genuine quest for respect, tolerance and peace.
Regarding the Israelis and Palestinians, it would have been important to hear the President put the conflict into its proper historical perspective -- six Arab nations attacked Israel from day one and the occupation of Palestinian land was a product of Israel's wars of self-defense. While strongly reiterating the importance of America's relationship with the State of Israel and articulating Israel's right to exist, President Obama missed the opportunity to address the misperceptions in the Arab world and to make clear that the Palestinians would have had a state had they accepted the United Nations resolution in 1948.
While he made strong statements against anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial, it should have been made clear that Israel's right to statehood is not a result of anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. We are disappointed that the President found the need to balance the suffering of the Jewish people in a genocide to the suffering of the Palestinian people resulting from Arab wars.
We are willing to give the President's approach a chance to work and we are waiting to hear a response from the moderate Arab states. It will be interesting to see how the Muslim world reacts to the speech.
0 Comments |
Share This
|
Lowey: ‘Compromise required on both sides’—but especially by Palestinians and Arabs
Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), chairwoman of the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Committee in the House, says she was pleased "the President articulated clearly the responsibilities of all the regional parties to create an environment conducive to viable negotiations toward a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians" -- particularly stressing the responsibilities on the Palestinian and Arab side.
"While compromise will be required on both sides, the Palestinians and Arab states must unequivocally denounce terrorism, recognize Israel, cease anti-Israel incitement at home and within the United Nations, and support viable PA institutions," Lowey said in a statement.
The full statement is after the jumpRead More >>>
0 Comments |
Share This
| 
Cairo speech |
Commentary crowd: Awful, not bad, bad—but not as bad as it could have been
President Obama's speech in Cairo is getting neutral to negative reviews on the Commentary blog -- which is better than he usually does over there.
New York Sun veteran Ira Stoll kicked things off with the harshest review, with a post titled "awful."
He starts off by taking aim at an Obama assertion that will probably trigger plenty of side debate in the next few days -- that there are 7 million Muslims living in the United States. And then moves on to the section on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
Even when Obama was trying to be nice to Israel, he was tone deaf: “America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied,” he said. The missing words were those usually present in such passages about shared democratic values and strategic interests.
The sections about the Palestinian Arabs were even weaker....
Next, former McCain adviser Max Boot weighed in, declaring the president's speech "not bad" -- as in, "Not bad. It could have been better. But it also could have been a lot worse." To be sure, he offered some criticisms, but in the end he offered this conclusion:
I realize that the Obama speech isn’t going to satisfy those (like me) who once thrilled to Bush’s unapologetic pro-democracy rhetoric but, for all of Obama’s rhetorical sleight of hands and elisions, I thought he did an effective job of making America’s case to the Muslim world. No question: He is a more effective salesman than his predecessor was. Which doesn’t mean that his audience will buy the message.
Finally, Jennifer Rubin jumped in, essentially starting from the same spot as Boot -- "The president's speech ... was not as horrific as some might have expected after the run of Israel bashing leading up to it and his prior apology tour in Europe." But instead of starting off with some criticisms before ending on a fairly positive note, she starts with a few nods before lashing into the remarks. Her conclusion:
Will this speech accomplish anything? The American elites will swoon. But it won’t do much of anything -- other than encourage Iran. The president operates from a false premise and paints a distorted picture of the region. It’s all everyone’s fault, and no one’s fault. And it’s about forgetting how we got to where we are. The Palestinians don’t lack a state because of Jewish settlements. They lack a state because they rejected one -- again and again. So long as Obama is being anything but “honest” I suspect we won’t see much progress, let alone peace.
0 Comments |
Share This
|
Cairo speech |
Hoenlein likes talk of ‘unbreakable’ bonds
Conference of Presidents executive vice chairman Malcolm Hoenlein praised President Obama's speech for reiterating the special relationship between the United States and Israel, but also said it could have been stronger in some other areas.
In a telephone interview with JTA, Hoenlein stressed that Obama stated "explicitly" the nature of the relationship between the U.S. and Israel and that the bonds between the two countries are "unbreakable." And he added that there was no "linkage" in the speech between progress on the Israeli-Palestinian issue and stopping Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.
The Conference of Presidents leader also applauded the speech's language condemning anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial, but said Obama's statement about Israel being born from years of persecution left out one critical fact: The Jewish people also have a 3,000 year-old historical connection to the land of Israel -- an important point to emphasize, he said, in the Muslim world.
Hoenlein did think the speech was "too mild" on Iran, and said that the president should have made a reference to the "Palestinian leadership" that has "failed" over the last six decades. He also was concerned that by mentioning a Israeli settlement freeze in his speech, Obama had "elevated" the issue so that it's the "be all, end all," while not proposing any concrete equivalent measures in his talk that the Palestinians or Arab states need to take.
He added, though, that one must take Obama's audience into account.
"This was a speech intended to reach out to the Muslim and Arab world," he said.
0 Comments |
Share This
|
Cairo speech |
AJC: Praise for rejection of anti-Semitism, but not enough on Iran
The American Jewish Committee is praising President Obama's speech for emphasizing that the rejection of anti-Semitism and the legitimatcy of Israel "were not negotiable," but the group was "disappointed" the president was not "more explicit about the danger Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons poses to the entire Middle East and to global security."
“In the heart of a region where denial is routine – denial of Israel’s right to exist, denial of the historic link of Jews to their homeland, denial of the Holocaust – President Obama spoke the truth with a clear, unwavering voice,” said David Harris, AJC executive director, referring to the portion of the speech in which Obama said that denying the Holocaust is "baseless, ignorant and hateful."
Harris also liked the president's statement that the U.S.'s "strong bonds" with Israel are "unbreakable," and his "personal commitment" to pursue "with all the patience a task requires" a negotiated settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, also noting positively his admonition that "violence must end."
On Iran, though, Harris said that the "U.S. has an obligation to more vigorously lead the international community in stopping the Iranian nuclear program."
AJC does not make any comment on the president's call for a settlement freeze in the statement.
The group's full statement is after the jump:Read More >>>
0 Comments |
Share This
|
Cairo speech |
Can he follow through?
Writing in The New Republic, Shmuel Rosner says Obama was "speaking the rhetoric of Reagan, while intending to execute the policy of George H.W. Bush" and says that the speech begs two questions:
One is quite obvious: Will the Arab and Muslim world believe Obama? Most Americans, according to a Gallup poll published yesterday, remain skeptical. But it will be the Arab response that will determine the answer to this first question.
The second question, though, is no less important, and it is a question to which an answer will emerge only with time, and action: Does Obama know not just how to say the right words, but also how to achieve all, or even a handful of, the goals he has so beautifully and expressively laid out today?
Rosner also has some observations about the Iran and Israeli-Palestinian portions of the speech:
In fact, the only aggressive message conveyed in the part dedicated to Iran actually seemed aimed at Israel: "No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons." This might mean future American pressure on Israel to disarm, as part of the deal the Obama team will be seeking with Tehran later this month.
Israel was anxiously waiting the speech, following two weeks of contentious public statements related to settlement building. On this topic, Obama hasn't added more fuel to the fire. But it was interesting to note how the Arab crowd cheered enthusiastically when he called for settlement freeze and the easing of restrictions on Palestinians, and sat silently, solemnly when he said that denying the holocaust was "baseless, ignorant, and hateful".
The president also said that the United States "cannot impose peace." That is one humble statement from a president who seemed to imply in recent weeks that this is exactly what the United States will be trying to do. Yesterday, summing up his visit to Washington, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak boldly criticized recent demands by the Obama team: "You have to be attached to facts of life," he said. "You can not expect the unreasonable to happen."
0 Comments |
Share This
|
Cairo speech |
APN: Speech is ‘golden opportunity’ (UPDATED)
Americans for Peace Now spokesman Ori Nir says that the president's speech represents a "rare moment in history" and anyone who rejects it will "owe a piercing explanation" to people in the region and Americans. Here's his full statement:
"For Israel and her neighbors, the President's speech represents a rare moment in history, a golden opportunity to choose peace over perpetual war, reconciliation over enmity. Those in the region and in America who reject the President's peacemaking offer, or work to thwart it, will owe a piercing explanation to people in the region, who are paying the price of war with blood, and to Americans, who seek global security and stability."
UPDATE: APN released a lengthier statement this afternoon. It can be seen after the jumpRead More >>>
0 Comments |
Share This
|
Cairo speech |
RJC: Speech too balanced
The Republican Jewish Coalition said President Obama's speech in Cairo was too balanced and "appear to mark the beginning of a worrisome shift in U.S. policy."
"President Barack Obama, in his major speech in Cairo this morning, struck a balanced tone with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and that's what was wrong with this speech," said RJC executive director Matt Brooks. "American policy should not be balanced -- it should side with those who fight terror, not those who either engage in it or are too weak to prevent it."
"We urge President Obama to return to the policy of holding the security of Israel as a key American priority and requiring significant, concrete, and verifiable moves toward peace from the Palestinian side," the Brooks statement said.
The full RJC statement is after the jumpRead More >>>
1 Comment |
Share This
|
Cairo speech |
J Street likes Obama’s ‘strong reaffirmation’ of two-state solution
J Street is praising President Obama's "strong reaffirmation of the essential interest the United States, Israel, Palestine and the world have in achieving a two-state resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – and of his intention to provide the leadership necessary to reach it."
"The President was clear," said J Street executive director Jeremy Ben-Ami. "Palestinians must renounce violence and accept Israel’s existence, Israel must stop settlement activity and end the humiliation of the Palestinian people that comes with their occupation, and the broader Arab world must step up to a more constructive role as well."
This will not happen without the bold, assertive leadership displayed by the President today or without dedicated follow-through and perseverance by the United States in the months ahead," the group said. "President Obama should know that the overwhelming majority of American Jews and other friends of Israel support his active diplomacy, his calls for an end to violence and settlements – and, most important, his intention to work publicly and aggressively to end the conflicts that have plagued the Middle East for far too long."
The full statement is after the jump:Read More >>>
0 Comments |
Share This
|
Cairo speech |
NJDC: Obama clear on Israel support (UPDATED)
The first Jewish group out witha statement on President Obama's speech is the National Jewish Democratic Council, which praises his statement that the U.S. and Israel have an "unbreakable" bond and his emphasis on the importance of Israel's security:
"President Barack Obama's speech this morning in Cairo did not just reiterate what the audience wanted to hear, but Obama was forthright about the acceptance of Israel and their legitimate needs," said Ira Forman, CEO of NJDC. "The President made very clear to the Arab world that he was going to continue to prioritize Israel's peace and security, and that the U.S. and Israel have an 'unbreakable' bond."
UPDATED: NJDC has released a longer statement. Here it is:
President Barack Obama’s speech this morning in Cairo did not just reiterate what the audience wanted to hear. Instead, Obama was forthright about the necessity for acceptance of the Jewish homeland in Israel and called for Palestinian abandonment of violence.
We praise Obama for reaching out to the Muslim world and for his commitment to Middle East peace. Similarly, we recognize his wisdom in speaking directly to the Muslim world about the need to abandon fantasies of destroying Israel and in reiterating America’s unbreakable bond with the Jewish State.
0 Comments |
Share This
|
Cairo speech |
Need to know? Get JTA's free e-newsletters!
