Obama and Israel

Do you remember Bitburg? Well, technically, I don’t either – I wasn’t born yet – but that’s why god gave us that internet. In May 1985, then-president Ronald Reagan accepted an invitation to commemorate the 40th anniversary of V-E Day by visiting a military cemetery near Bitburg, Germany. The problem was that there happened to be a bunch of SS soldiers interred there, Nazi war decorations and all. Although the decorations were removed for the visit, and Reagan took the opportunity to spew some generic “never again” rhetoric, critics still saw it as a bitterly ironic slight; a commemoration of fascism by a man whose career was supposedly dedicated to fighting an oppressive dictatorship.

Musings on Bitburg might not seem relevant in America 2009 – the country that voted “against racism” and “for change” in wall-sized quotation marks – but President Obama’s policy towards Israel is reminiscent of Reagan’s tasteless field trip. That is, it’s just one giant ideological contradiction wrapped up in rosy rhetoric for the folks at home.

On June 4 2008, Obama gave a speech to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee. In it, he recited the standard politician boilerplate on the Israel-Palestine conflict: Israel needs security, Israel has a right to defense, let’s fight Iran, etc. Right up front, though, he made an interesting remark that, to me, highlights the hypocrisy inherent in these rabidly pro-Israel remarks. Courtesy of npr.org: “I was drawn to the belief that you could sustain a spiritual, emotional and cultural identity. And I deeply understood the Zionist idea — that there is always a homeland at the center of our story.”

Uh huh. Again: “I deeply understood the Zionist idea — that there is always a homeland at the center of our story.”

Now, I don’t mean to condescend, but I have to ask: does he know what that means? Does he know what kind of actions have been inspired by “the Zionist idea” around the world? History has not been kind to those who have decided to simply move into another (already occupied) land and pretend like the indigenous people simply don’t exist.

Take Liberia, for example. In 1822, an organization called the American Colonization Society began sending African-American slaves to Liberia under the auspices of giving them a homeland. The ACS counted both abolitionists and slave owners among its ranks and it shows. Many of the Society’s actions were supported by southern whites who feared post-abolition riots and unrest. The subtext of the establishment of Liberia was, “get them out of here before they mess up my mansion.” And, subsequently, the Americans who arrived in Liberia proceeded to treat the indigenous Liberians like trash. They were hostile, discriminatory and exclusive. They made no effort to integrate into the culture of their new “homeland.” The result, predictably, was years of strife and civil unrest.

If you’re not seeing the parallels between Liberia and Israel, I’ll make it simple: it is impossible to simply take one group’s land and it give it to another group as a bizarre form of apology from an unrelated party. One group always feels superior; the other, slighted.

Of course, if you want an example that’s closer to home, look no further than the ideology of manifest destiny that our very own United States of American was founded on. The belief in white superiority and the existence of a homeland meant for a particular group of settlers engendered hundreds of years of genocide and imprisonment. It ultimately led to the murder of Native Americans and enslavement of Africans and the exclusion and belittlement of group after group of immigrants. The founding rhetoric of this country set the tone and made possible atrocity after atrocity.

And now, as everyone is ready to claim victory against the forces of oppression and racism, the man who served as the catalyst for this new wave of optimism endorses an even more extreme version of these very same forces. Israel has killed thousands of men, women and children under the auspices of fighting terrorism and preserving its security. They have destroyed countless homes and communities in Palestine while illegally expanding their borders and frequently attempting to seize land from surrounding countries. The latest rumblings in Gaza serve as a reminder to Americans of what daily life is like for Palestinians: a mélange of terror, death, oppression and inhuman living conditions largely paid for by the American government and its approximately $84 billion annual grant to Israel. That’s one-third of our total foreign aid payout, according to the Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs.

Doesn’t it strike anyone as ironic? Is it just me or is it galling to watch Obama talk about the new age we’re entering as we shrug off the yoke of racism while reaffirming our commitment to funding the oppression of the Palestinians? How can he support the Zionist ideal and also celebrate American progress? How can the first black president of this country so zealously support an ideology that always has, and always will bring about racism and oppression?

In his inaugural address, Obama remarked that it was amazing to be sworn in as president so near to a restaurant that his father wouldn’t have been able to dine at in the not-so-distant past. As he’s signing off on that $84 billion, I would ask him – and all Americans – to consider this: for many Palestinians it would be amazing to not live in fear of military invasion, to be able to have a land of their own that they could roam freely, to not have to fear the destruction of their lives, family and property by an insatiably expansionistic government. I would ask him – and all Americans – to consider that he has a part in this process and that he could do something about it.

If that happens, maybe I’ll buy into all the hope and change rhetoric that’s being thrown around like so much cheap confetti at some distant relative’s wedding. Until then, it will be just that: cheap.

Tags: Barack Obama