One of the interesting subtexts about the debate over the nomination of Chuck Hagel to be secretary of defense has been the relative silence from the organized Jewish world. Though there was widespread shock from most pro-Israel activists, even those who were loyal liberal Democrats, about the president’s decision to choose one of the least Israel-friendly members of the U.S. Senate in the last generation to run the Pentagon, none of the major groups, aside from the Zionist Organization of America, spoke up publicly about his unsuitability for the post or his out-of-the mainstream views.
The reasons for this silence were obvious to anyone who understands their missions and how they operate. The refusal of the major Jewish organizations was rooted in their natural reluctance to embroil themselves in fights they think would hamper their ability to do their jobs. But at this juncture in the Hagel saga, after the nominee flopped at his Senate confirmation hearing and demonstrated how insincere his conversion from being tough on Israel and soft on Iran to a garden-variety backer of the Jewish state, it is time for them to reconsider. Though the odds still favor his confirmation, and with some senators, including Chuck Schumer and Claire McCaskill, citing their silence for their support for the nominee, the rationale of the organized Jewish world for staying out of this contretemps has evaporated.
Groups like the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee or even AIPAC are not in the business of involving themselves in partisan fights. Nor are they interested in futile gestures that embroil them in squabbles that would make it more difficult for them to gain access to decision makers. These are things that often infuriate people who rail at them for not being representative of ordinary Jews or being “self-appointed” leaders. But these are generally unfair criticisms.
All Jewish groups in this country are voluntary associations. If the heads of these groups are not elected by a broad cross-section of the community it is only because most Jews don’t take the trouble to get involved with these organizations. We can argue about whether many of the so-called “major” groups still perform any vital functions. Indeed, many of them are vestigial remnants that have long ceased having any rationale other than institutional inertia. Others are mere partisan fronts for the political parties (the Republican Jewish Coalition has actively campaigned against Hagel while the National Jewish Democratic Council has tried to downplay the appointment) or Jewish surrogates for other liberal causes. Many are merely fundraising outlets for various causes. But some do still perform vital tasks, like compiling data about anti-Semitism or advocacy on behalf of Israel, and don’t deserve all of the scorn that is thrown in their direction.
However, the Hagel nomination illustrated that groups that see themselves as above politics can’t entirely avoid some fights. The nomination of a person who has publicly bragged about his standing up to the “Jewish lobby” and opposed sanctions or even the threat of using force against Iran should have crossed the line between something that merely raised eyebrows and battle that needed to be fought.
Some of the major organizations, or at least their leading donors, are dyed-in the-wool Democrats who would never put themselves in direct opposition to the president. Yet even those who were privately upset about Hagel reasoned that the campaign to stop Hagel was doomed. After abandoning Susan Rice, his preferred candidate for the State Department, there was good reason to believe that President Obama would fight harder for his “soul mate” at Defense. A popular president whose party has a majority in the Senate is not liable to lose such a nomination fight, so they thought it made more sense to shut up about Hagel and retain their access than to fight and lose.
This was a not unreasonable conclusion, but it was also a self-fulfilling prophecy. While many Jewish leaders were hoping that Hagel could be stopped without their help, by their very silence they gave cover to pro-Israel Democrats who decided that avoiding giving offense to the president took precedent over defending their principles. On this point, Schumer, whose announcement of public support for the nominee seemed to take all the drama out of the confirmation battle, has been quite candid, as he has explained that it was impossible for him to fight Hagel while Jewish groups kept their own counsel.
But my expectation that Schumer’s move would more or less end the controversy was confounded by Hagel’s catastrophic performance at his Senate confirmation hearing on Thursday. At this point even those who have no problem with Hagel’s troubling positions are grappling with the fact that the president’s choice has given the appearance of incompetence and an inability to articulate the president’s stated positions on the issues.
It was assumed that Hagel’s confirmation conversion to positions that affirmed the alliance with Israel and hostility to Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran would be done in such a manner as to at least quiet concerns about his transformation from foe to friend of the pro-Israel community. But at his hearing, Hagel was not just unprepared; the insincerity of his flip-flops was transparent. He refused to admit that he was wrong to refuse to vote to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group. Nor did he disavow his slanders about Israel’s conduct during the 2006 Lebanon War. And he could not give a straight answer as to his views about containment of Iran even when given three tries to do so.
At this moment, when even partisan Democrats are expressing their discomfort about Hagel, it is time for the major Jewish groups to, at the very least, express their belief that the nomination should be reconsidered. They needn’t issue an outright call for a no vote on his confirmation or directly fight the president. But they can speak out about the problematic nature of what Hagel said at his hearing and whether the president ought to think twice about insisting on shoving him down the throat of an obviously troubled Democratic caucus.
Doing so would involve some risk and cause them to be criticized by some Democratic partisans. But as they already know, the only people who are actually enthusiastic about Hagel are those, like the vicious Israel-basher MJ Rosenberg, who think the nominee is lying about changing his views about Israel and Iran.
Let’s also dispense with the notion that if Jewish groups speak out on Hagel, they will be confirming the myth that the “Israel Lobby” is an all-powerful force that, as the nominee said, “intimidates” Congress into doing “stupid things.” It is true that that is what some foes of Israel will say if Hagel loses. But the truth is they are already saying it and the vast majority of Americans—who are the backbone of the bipartisan consensus in support of Israel—reject these slanders. The question now is whether an advocate of those views, even one who has now disavowed some of that statement, albeit in a manner that lacks all credibility, will be elevated to one of the highest positions in the government.
Whatever it was that Hagel has been telling Democrats like Schumer or even the big Jewish groups who got a private meeting with the nominee, no one who watched that hearing can seriously believe his protestations of a change of heart. Though he may still be confirmed if the president goes to the mat for him, the outcome is by no means certain. That means this is a moment when the major Jewish groups must drop their reticence and speak truth courageously to power.
Though it is often wise for such groups to stay out of fights with the White House, this is not the moment for such caution. Were the major groups to call for a reconsideration of his nomination, it could be the tipping point in the debate. Should they fail to find their voices now about Hagel, many of the good people inside these organizations may have reason to look back with regret on their decisions. Hagel’s appointment raises genuine doubts about this administration’s commitment to stopping Iran’s nuclear threat and continued support of Israel at a time when its enemies (such as the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt) are gaining strength. Silence at such a moment is impossible for men and women of conscience.
Let Hagel run Defense. His screw ups will be Obama's fault. Israel will not take Hagel seriously, and in fact Hagel's appointment and the Obama presidency may be a a watershed clarifying moment for Israel on the danger of 'trusting to princes' (and trusting the organized American Jewish Community). n nClarity is always good. And better an incompetent enemy rather than a a James Baker, no? n n
The "Jewish Lobby"; that snarling pack of vicious Chihuahuas. Just invite them to a White House conference now and again and you'll have them eating out of your hand.
As a Jewish supporter of Israel I feel that Christians United for Israel far better fights for my interests than any of the mainstream Jewish organizations, which seem to believe that the Judenraet was right: keep quiet, not antagonize the powers that be, and hope for some influence in delaying the death sentence. Such is the state of America's Jewish community – and by the way a demographically shrinking one again thanks to the combined failures of the mainstream Jewish organizations.
With the exception of the ZOA, agree completely.
The ZOA is really no longer a mainstream Jewish organization, because if you recall early on in Hussein's "peace be upon him" administration the ZOA was not invited to a White House meeting of all of the "major Jewish organizations." Reflecting the typicial lip service American Jews give to "Klal Yisrael," none of the "Jewish leaders" protested Morty Klein's exclusion.
Yes, but all that means is that Obama and his cohorts don't consider the ZOA 'mainstream'. What they really meant was that the ZOA is much too pro-Israel, of course. And, as you point out, 'mainstream leaders' (as defined by Hussein) gave a rather sick performance in allowing the exclusion.
it's a pretty sad state of affairs, especially when you think of how many liberal "Jews" (I use that term advisedly) are suspicious of evangelical Christians. "the only reason they want to help Israel is to hasten the end times and bring on this Rapture they think is coming," a Jewish friend said to me. while that eschatological angle may be part of it, my Christian friends who support Israel have a real love for the country and its people. it's unfortunate that many Jews don't want that help.
“As a Jewish supporter of Israel I feel that Christians United for Israel far better fights for my interests than any of the mainstream Jewish organizations”r nr nConcur
Concur!!!
The Democ-rats of Jewish origin in the United States Senate are nothing more than a compliant Judenrat!
Haegel will be confirmed.He is well suited,through his own experiences with the terrible toll that nwar demands. He was picked for the job by the President,you know,the guy who won reelection nIn the words of one of your favorite jurists,Antonin Scalia,when answering critics of the outrageous nInterference by a conservative court which gave the Presidency to "W"' GET OVER IT !
seriously? after that disastrous confirmation hearing, I'm surprised anyone still thinks Hagel is "well suited" to run anything. and to let him any nearer the Pentagon than the visitor information booth is just dangerous. n nfor the moment, let's ignore his views; like MJ Rosenberg, I'm sure Hagel still privately thinks the Evil Joos are out to get him, and that Hezbollah is just a neighborhood activist group. n nbut forget about that. did the guy that you saw testify inspire confidence? let's say he was interviewing to be your boss; would that performance make you say "Gosh, I hope they hire HIM"? n nObama has the right to choose whomever he wants. Congress, OTOH, has not only the right but the obligation to stand athwart the nominee yelling "Stop!" if they think there's a valid reason to do so. n nbtw, it's a funny thing about that absolute right of presidents to pick their own cabinet and SCOTUS nominees. for some reason, it only applies to Democrats. when George W. Bush was in office, dissent was the highest form of patriotism, remember? n n
He's well suited to turn the Pentagon into yet another federal Muslim outreach center. With sufficient concentration and a couple of days coaching he'll be well suited to perambulating his office desk without bonking his nose against the wall.
A President's "right" to choose his cabinet members is limited by the advice and consent role of the Senate. The Senate did not consent to Lewis Strauss's nomination by reelected President Eisenhower as Secretary of Commerce over who remembers what! This nomination by a president far weaker than Eisenhower must be fought and defeated!
And don’t forget what happened to John Tower, who was a senator.
He's a self-evident incompetent. This isn't one Democratic Party state yet. Nor was stopping Democratic Party shysters from running roughshod over Florida state law in order to steal a Presidential election outrageous. You know we already have more than enough people repeating Democratic Party talking points in that self-righteous tone Dems reserve for their outstandingly retarded assertions.
Still, and in the words of highly credentialed re-elected Reagan Presidential-pick Supreme Court Justice Bork… n nOh. n nNever mind.
At the risk of sounding like an apologist for some of the groups who have stayed out of the fray, at least publicly, just what is it that the truly non- or bi-partisan lobbying organizations — principally AIPAC — supposed to do? The liberal groups will acquiesce because they see eye-to-eye with Obama; the conservative groups already have spoken out, but given that the Dems hold the Senate and the White House, no one is going to pay them any attention. AIPAC's aim is to strengthen the Israel-US relationship through bi-partisan lobbying, education and outreach. As uncomfortable as it is to watch as a partisan and an individual who cares deeply about the things AIPAC promotes, the Hagel nomination fight is not an issue for it to pick a fight.
Sparkey, this IS an issue on which to pick a fight. Hagel has said things which should be unacceptable to EVERY Jew and Jewish organization regardless of their stands on other issues. If a conservative had said such things the Jewish organizations would be out in front (as they were when President Reagan visited Bitberg). Not picking a fight here shows every Senator and House member that the Jewish organizations have no guts when the chips are down. What Hagel said makes the "education and outreach" of the Jewish organizations pale into nothing. This is a fight that MUST be made!
Dav — I agree that this is an issue over which it is worth a fight. Two things, though: 1) many liberal and middle-of-the-road Jews either will not get animated or downright disagree with us; 2) my comment was to point out that AIPAC's mission is not furthered by publicly getting in the middle of these kinds of fights. Hagel is an idiot, to be sure. He has shown himself as unqualified for the post. He is not a friend of Israel and that will not change. But this does not end well for AIPAC or the cause of Israel-US relations if AIPAC is public or too strident in expressing that view. n nAs for Bitburg, Reagan stepped in it and was called on it before he went. He went anyway (for less than 10 minutes), for reasons more to do with Helmut Kohl. But Reagan also visited Bergen-Belsen. I am not sure that AIPAC's speaking out on Hagel will end as benignly (Obama likes revenge; Reagan rarely was ever petulant).
Sparklaw writes that "AIPAC's mission is not furthered by publicly getting in the middle of these kinds of fights. " WHAT then is AIPAC's "mission"? Sticking up the jewish community's posterior in the air and watching as it's kicked by the likes of an incompentent senator who a Democ-rat nominates for a cabinet post after that senator has routinely voted against alomst all of the Democ-rat Party's domestic agenda? And what does it say of the Democ-rats of jewish and non-Jewish origin about their sincerity in supporting that agenda if they march in the same lockstep the Germans used when they marched into Prague, Vienna and Paris? n nWhat "does not end well for AIPAC " and other Jewish organizations which were so quick to scream against President Reagan's falsh visit to Bitbert is that they're exposed as gutless wonders when it comes to a Democ-RAT!
I would call their bluff. Call for an immediate plan from the Pentagon on winding down military aid and cooperation of all types, with Israel. $3 billion @ 75% spent in the US – let them sort it out amongst themselves. The US purchases billions in defense gear and services FROM Israel. Mark it up in price accordingly the next round of contract negotiations. This would include cruise missiles, anti tank missiles, air to ground missiles, anti missile missiles. n nAnd last but not least terminate cooperation in the F-35 White Elephant. Israel was intended to be one of the largest foreign markets for it. Terminate it now and tie down Turkey – who's just going to sell F-35 secrets to Iran anyway. Take the investment and put it in the next generation of jet powered stealth attack drones instead. Israeli electronics and materials science coupled with South Korean aircraft manufacturing expertise? The engine in the Korean KAI TA-50 (last round contender advanced jet trainer) is a GE unit already one of the most licensed and modified engines in the world including its current use in developmental versions of stealth drones today. n nIsrael needs to calmly and coldly disengage from what is perceived to be their vassal state status with a US that is increasingly hostile to them anyhow.
Hear hear. Exactly right. n nThere's the one small issue of he UN Security Council Veto. n nUntil the UN falls apart, that is still a concern. n
well if the lobster's alternative is to have the flame turned up all at once or a little little at a time, maybe its best bet is to hop out of the pot altogether and take its chances
With the USA broke bankrupt kaput after two lost wars, we need a replacement strong ally against the threats posed to Israel. The next superpower China is a close trading partner and has values consistent with Israel.
With the discovery of oil and gas off the Haifa shore and the Russians and Chinese interested in it enough to partner with Israel, Israel may not need American support any longer. When the Russians are your ally, as Don Corleone put it, your enemies become their enemies and look out.
Israel's shale oil is SE of Jerusalem, not offshore. nTexas is already there with the fracking technology. nTexas is Israel's #4 trade partner, and too bad the Texas National Guard can not be deployed without Obama's permission. nRussia's Gazprom has gotten involved in the offshore gas fields, but Gazprom wants to control natural gas prices to their customers, so who knows how that will play out.
It's a disgrace to see AIPAC and similar organizations following the reasoning of the old Jew-in0the-cattle-car joke and saying, "Shush! You don't want to make trouble."
The ostensibly Jewish organizations are primarily left-wing political institutions. Moreover, their members hesitate to oppose a black president. They are very fearful of being charged with racism. These same people would be screaming bloody murder if a Republican president dared to nominate Chuck Hagel.
The more logical explanation is that these "self-appointed" leaders won't oppose hussein because fitting in with their husseinist friends is much more important to them than the welfare of Israel. Just like in the 1930s [substituting fdr for hussein and euro Jews for Israel]. n nAnd in fact, they are "self-appointed" leaders. Do any of the groups you are a member of give you a chance to vote on them or the org's board of directors? No, of course not. While you may complain abt corporate governance in the business world, there you at least get a vote, but NOT with these "self-appointed" leaders. n nAnd I add that hagel COULD be stopped if there were 41 menschen among the Repubs [or heaven forbid, dems]. Recall that the eminently qualified John Bolton was blocked by a filibuster.
The Hagel nomination voids the argument that Obama's Jewish surrogates (including Ed Koch adn Alan Dershowitz) made for his reelection: that relations with Bibi notwithstanding, under Obama, the US and Israel enjoy unprecedented military and intelligence cooperation. n nThat ends forthwith with Hagel at the helm. n nThis is no doubt some of the "flexibility" that Obama was talking about in his open-mike comment to Medvedev. I think Dershowitz and other Obama apologists (too late for Koch) need to speak out on this nomination more than anyone else in the Jewish community.
Schumer's presence at Ed Koch's funeral today shows the two things decent people should HATE about Democ-rats of Jewish origin–their face! They pine about their love for israel and the Jewish people and support a dirtpile like Hagel when their left wing president demands it. Between the Democ-rat Party and the Jewish People the Democ-rat of Jewish origin will always choose the Party. This was evident since 1976 when future Senator Frank Lautenberg wrote an article in the Bnai Brith's National Jewish Monthly supporting Jimmy Carter's renomination and reelection. Garbage is he, garbage are they all!
I still don;t think Hagel will make any difference in Israel-American relationship under Obama, n nas Hagel said, he will not be making policy n nBUT n nthis administration sure looks stupid nominating a doufus like Hagel n nWhat do our friends and enemies think-both Kerry and Hagel trash talking the USA and ol' al Quds Brennan? n n
Instead of "Jewish Democ-rats" call them "Democ-rats of Jewish origin," a Stalinist term that fits them perfectly. As for the Jewish organizations generally and AIPAC specifically, they are nothing more than tails on the Democ-rat Party kite. They are beneath contempt!