The Senator, His Pastor and the Israel Lobby
by Ali Abunimah
The following article first appeared on the author's web
site, The
Electronic Intifada, on March 31, prior to Barack Obama's final repudiation
of Rev. Jeremiah Wright. We are making up for our oversight in failing to
publish the article then, by doing so now. - The Editors.
US Senator Barack Obama was widely hailed for his 18
March speech calming the media furor about the sermons of his pastor for
twenty years, Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Wright's remarks, Obama said,
"expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees
white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all
that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the
Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel,
instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical
Islam."
It might seem odd for Obama to mention Israel and "radical Islam" in
a speech focused on US race relations, especially since Wright's most widely
reported comments were about America's historic and ongoing oppression of its
black citizens.
But for months, even before most Americans had heard of Wright, prominent
pro-Israel activists were hounding Obama over Wright's views on Israel and ties
to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. In January, Abraham Foxman, National
Director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), demanded that Obama denounce
Farrakhan as an anti-Semite. The senator duly did so, but that was not enough.
"[Obama has] distanced himself from his pastor's decision to honor Farrakhan,"
Foxman said, but "He has not distanced himself from his pastor. I think
that's the next step." Foxman labeled Wright "a black racist,"
adding in the same breath, "Certainly he has very strong anti-Israel
views" (Larry Cohler-Esses, "ADL
Chief To Obama: 'Confront Your Pastor' On Minister Farrakhan," The
Jewish Week, 16 January 2008). Criticism of Israel, one suspects, is
Wright's truly unforgivable crime and Foxman's vitriol has echoed through
dozens of pro-Israel blogs.
"Even before most
Americans had heard of Wright, prominent pro-Israel activists were hounding
Obama over Wright's views on Israel and ties to Nation of Islam leader Louis
Farrakhan."
Since his early political life in Chicago, Barack Obama was well-informed about
the Middle East and had expressed nuanced views conveying an understanding that
justice and fairness, not blinkered support for Israel, are the keys to peace
and the right way to combat extremism. Yet for months he has been fighting the
charge that he is less rabidly pro-Israel than other candidates - which means
now adhering to the same simplistic formulas and unconditional support for
Israeli policies that have helped to escalate conflict and worsen America's
standing in the Middle East. Hence Obama's assertion at his 26 February debate
with Senator Hillary Clinton that he is "a stalwart friend of
Israel."
But Obama stressed that his appeal to Jewish voters also stems from his desire
"to rebuild what I consider to be a historic relationship between the
African American community and the Jewish community."
Obama has not addressed to a national audience why that relationship might have
frayed. He was much more candid when speaking to Jewish leaders in Cleveland
just one day before the debate. In a little-noticed comment, reported on 25
February by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Obama tried to contextualize
Wright's critical views of Israel. Wright, Obama
explained, "was very active in the South Africa divestment movement
and you will recall that there was a tension that arose between the African
American and the Jewish communities during that period when we were dealing
with apartheid in South Africa, because Israel and South Africa had a
relationship at that time. And that cause - that was a source of tension."
Obama implicitly admitted that Wright's views were rooted in opposition to
Israel's deep ties to apartheid South Africa, and thus entirely reasonable even
if Obama himself did "not necessarily," as he put it, share them.
Israel supplied South Africa with hundreds of millions of dollars of weaponry
despite an international embargo. Even the water cannons that South African
forces used to attack anti-apartheid demonstrators in the townships were
manufactured at Kibbutz Beit Alfa, a "socialist" settlement in
northern Israel. Until the late 1980s, South Africa often relied on Israel to
lobby Western governments not to impose sanctions.
"Israel supplied South
Africa with hundreds of millions of dollars of weaponry despite an
international embargo."
And the relationship was durable. As The Washington Post reported in
1987, "When it comes to Israel and South Africa, breaking up is hard to
do." Israeli officials, the newspaper said, "face conflicting
imperatives: their desire to get in line with the West, which has adopted a
policy of mild but symbolic sanctions, versus Israel's longstanding friendship
with the Pretoria government, a relationship that has been important for
strategic, economic and, at times, sentimental reasons" ("An Israeli
Dilemma: S. African Ties; Moves to Cut Links Are Slowed by Economic Pressures,
Sentiment," The Washington Post, 20 September 1987).
In 1987, Jesse Jackson, then the world's most prominent African American
politician, angered some Jewish American leaders for insisting that
"Whoever is doing business with South Africa is wrong, but Israel is ...
subsidized by America, which includes black Americans' tax money, and then it
subsidizes South Africa" ("Jackson Draws New Criticism From Jewish
Leaders Over Interview," Associated Press, 16 October 1987). As a
presidential candidate, Jackson raised the same concerns in a high profile
meeting with the Israeli ambassador, as did a delegation of black civil rights
and religious leaders, including the nephew of Martin Luther King Jr, on a
visit to Israel. For many African Americans, it was intolerable hypocrisy that
so many Jewish leaders who staunchly supported Civil Rights and the
anti-apartheid movement would be tolerant of Israel's complicity.
Thus, Reverend Wright, who has sought a broader understanding of the Middle
East than one that blames Islam and Arabs for all the region's problems or
endorses unconditional support for Israel, stood in the mainstream of African
American opinion, not on some extremist fringe.
"Why must every black candidate to a major office go
through the ritual of denouncing Farrakhan."
By contrast, neither Senator Joe Lieberman (Al Gore's running mate in 2000 and
the first Jewish candidate on a major party presidential ticket), nor Senator
John McCain have been required so publicly and so repeatedly to repudiate
extremist and racist comments by Israeli leaders or some well-known radical
Christian leaders supporting the Republican party. Foxman, whose organization
devotes enormous resources to burnishing Israel's image, has rarely spoken out
about the escalating anti-Arab racism and incitement to violence by prominent
Israeli politicians and rabbis.
That is no surprise. African Americans, Arab Americans and Muslims all share
some things in common: individuals are held collectively responsible for the
words and actions of others in their community whether they had anything to do
with them or not. And the price of admission to the political mainstream is to
abandon any foreign policy goals that diverge from those of the pro-Israel,
anti-Palestinian lobby.
Co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah is author of One
Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse
(Metropolitan Books, 2006).