The Conservative Political Action Conference released its second round of invited speakers today, and there’s a surprising name near the top of the list. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was invited, along with Canadian PM Stephen Harper.
Netanyahu actually spoke at CPAC back in 2001, as Phil Klein pointed out on Twitter. But that was in between premierships, which is a very different case. While Netanyahu will probably already be in Washington for AIPAC’s Policy Conference the week before, and it would be great to see him speak at CPAC, there’s no way it will actually happen. It would be silly for him to attend now, right after being accused of siding with the Mitt Romney campaign and while he still needs to maintain a veneer of cordial relations with President Obama.
The invite itself is interesting, though. First, it’s another example of how support for Israel has become ingrained as a conservative value issue. And second, it’s a subtle snub against the libertarian and paleoconservative anti-Israel and anti-war activists who have tried unsuccessfully to hijack CPAC for the last several years–including jeering Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld as “war criminals” in 2011. I can only imagine the reception Netanyahu would get from this small but vocal group of hecklers, so CPAC is brave extending the invite, even if the Israeli PM is unlikely to accept.
WOW ! ! ! ! n nBibi N speaking at CPAC would be enough for me to stomach their truly offensive new age-based registration fee system and attend, him speaking is something that I would actually like to see in person. Furthermore, unlike Cheney & Rumsfield, Bibi N rose in a parliamentary system of government, and that means both that you have to be able to think on your feet and respond quickly/effectively to hecklers. n nI strongly suspect that he is very good at this — at least in Hebrew — and I suspect he not only can also do it in English but that it would be worth watching. And why should CPAC live in fear of heckling troublemakers, and how many will show up now that Ron Paul isn't bringing whole bunches of them in an attempt to win the "straw vote" anymore? n nThis may well be brinkmanship on the Hagel nomination — a shot across Obama's bow that if Hagel becomes the SecDef, there is going to be one truly priceless condemnation of him, in front of a cheering AMERICAN audience, broadcast on CSPAN. To the extent they depend upon support from Jewish voters, it is also a shot across the bow of the Pro-Israel Democrats — they have to know that the financial supporters of their likely Republican opponent will be present at CPAC even if the actual candidate isn't. If anything, that would be the price Bibi N pays for speaking at CPAC, but at what point have the pro-Israel Democrats become irrelevant? n nBut as to Ms. Goodman's larger issue — Israel *is* a conservative issue. For issues far beyond Judaism and Israel itself, Israel is the right of the individual versus the tyranny of the majority, Israel represents Locke's tradition of God-Given individual rights of "Life, Liberty & Property" which are not subject to the whim of the majority.
I will disagree with Ms. Goodman on one point though — one needs to be careful not to confuse Paleoconservativism with Isolationism, they are two different things. The Isolationist doesn't want to deal with anything beyond our shores — the "Fortress America" myth that might have worked in the 19th Century but not afterwards. There is a strong Paleoconservative argument — at least as I understand it — for supporting Israel, a military ally, which is something quite different from being the "world's policeman" and getting tied down in assorted "nation building" exercises. n n
As interesting as that sounds, I wouldn't want Bibi to attend CPAC. He is the leader of Israel and shouldn't dip his toe in US domestic politics since we have few friends in the world. The media establishment is trying its best to make Israel wedge issue with American Jews and Bibi needs to tread lightly. We don't need to give J Street, Peter Beinart, et al more ammunition for liberal Jews to 'sever' ties with the Jewish State.
Two things — first, the Liberal (capitol "L") Jews haven't severed their ties with Israel already? n nSecond, I don't consider Israel to be "the Jewish State." Instead, I consider Israel to be a sovereign country and an ally of America. Israel is not a theocracy, this is an important point to make.