When seen from Capitol Hill, Jerusalem looks a bit different
What’s the U.S. policy toward Israel? It may depend on which branch of government you ask.
On Capitol Hill, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu got a warm reception during his Washington visit this week. Eric Cantor, the only Jewish Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives, says Congress is on “a different page” than the Obama administration over Jewish settlements in Jerusalem and the overall U.S. relationship with Israel.
Netanyahu got a less obviously effusive welcome from the Obama administration. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met him at a hotel on Monday and his White House meeting with the president on Tuesday took place behind closed doors, without photographers present.
But on Capitol Hill he was warmly, openly and officially received by leading lawmakers. Cameras clicked and rolled as Netanyahu was greeted in ornate reception rooms, first in the House of Representatives, then in the Senate Tuesday. In between, he lunched with lawmakers.
The Israeli prime minister got to hear his own words echo around the hallowed halls of Congress as well. At the morning meeting with Netanyahu, “Many of us said, Jerusalem is not a settlement,” Cantor told Reuters afterwards.
This had been Netanyahu’s line in a speech to the influential pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC on Monday evening, where he struck a defiant note after new criticism from Clinton of Jewish home construction in disputed territory in and around Jerusalem.
Cantor, the third-ranking Republican in the House, said he and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Democrat, are circulating for lawmakers’ signatures a letter to Clinton expressing concerns about the direction of U.S. policy. ”We are writing to reaffirm our commitment to the unbreakable bond that exists bewteen our country and the State of Israel and to express to you our deep concern over recent tension,” the letter says.
Hamas unendorses Obama after speech to pro-Israel lobby
WASHINGTON – Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama may have taken care of his Hamas problem on Wednesday with a speech to the AIPAC pro-Israel lobby. The Illinois senator was ridiculed, criticized and generally harassed back in April when a top Hamas adviser, Ahmed Yousef, told a radio interviewer that the Palestinian militant group — considered a terrorist organization by the U.S. government — liked Obama and hoped he would win the U.S. presidential election.
Yousef’s remarks were labeled a Hamas endorsement and Republican John McCain used them as part of a fundraising appeal to supporters. Obama’s denunciations of Hamas and criticism of McCain over the incident did little to undo the damage. That may have changed Wednesday, when Obama went before American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington a day after clinching the Democratic nomination and declared his strong support for Israel. Israel’s security is sacrosanct and it must retain a qualitative military advantage, Obama said. Any peace deal must include Palestinian recognition that Jerusalem would remain Israel’s undivided capital, he said. Hamas promply unendorsed Obama, a Christian who has had difficulty dispelling a rumor campaign suggesting he is a Muslim and that his advisers have a pro-Arab bent. “Obama’s comments have confirmed that there will be no change in the U.S. administration’s foreign policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict,” Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters in Gaza. “The Democratic and Republican parties support totally the Israeli occupation at the expense of the interests and rights of Arabs and Palestinians,” he said. “Hamas does not differentiate between the two presidential candidates, Obama and McCain, because their policies regarding the Arab-Israel conflict are the same and are hostile to us, therefore we do have no preference and are not wishing for either of them to win,” Zuhri said.
Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage.
Photo credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque (Obama speaks at AIPAC conference)
No ‘Siege’ of Gaza
•A Siege is an act of surrounding and attacking in order to cut off supply and aid.
•Israel is neither surrounding nor attacking Gaza, nor has Israel cut off supplies or aid.
•Israel has withdrawn from Gaza to promote peace, whilst facing a constant barrage of rocket attacks perpetrated by Hamas.
•Israel maintains a constant flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza to relieve the suffering of Palestinians under the Hamas regime, whilst admitting thousands of sick Palestinians into Israel for medical treatment in Israeli hospitals.
Hospital Access Facts: (Source COGAT, Israel’s Unit for Coordination of Government Activities in Territories)
o 2006 4,754 hospital entry permits given to Palestinians from Gaza into Israel
o 2007 7,226 hospital entry permits given
o 2008 2,317 hospital permits given in Jan to Feb alone.
•All permits include one family member
•Palestinians receive world class treatment in major Israeli hospitals.
•No distinction made by doctors between Palestinian and Israeli patients
•Hamas members are treated in Israeli hospitals regardless of their previous actions
•Barzilai hospital treated Gazan Palestinians whilst the hospital was under rocket attack.
•From Jan 2007 to Feb 2008, 14,297 Palestinians were treated in Israeli hospitals
•During the same period Israel suffered 1,110 rocket attacks and 1,384 mortar attacks.
•These attacks have a devastating effect on the 200,000 residents of Israeli towns near Gaza
Conclusion
The term ‘siege’ when applied to Israel’s policy towards Gaza is a fallacy. The Israeli Government continues to uphold its ethical commitment to providing medical care for Palestinians living under Hamas control, even whilst local Israeli towns suffer Gazan rocket attacks. This shows Israel’s high level of commitment to provision of hospital access to civilians in Gaza regardless of the constant attacks on Israeli population centers.
Different enough to tell them to stand on their own two feet? Cut ties and stop policing the world. We cannot afford it any longer