[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Israelis root for Clinton; Palestinians are behind Obama JERUSALEM -- It might not be worth any delegates at the Democratic Party nominating convention, but it appears that Hillary Clinton has a big lead in the informal Tel Aviv primary, while Barrack Obama is poised to sweep Ramallah. There's arguably nowhere else in the world, outside of the United States itself, where the outcome of the presidential elections is seen as so important. Whoever wins the White House will inevitably preside over some form of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, as even the initially reticent Mr. Bush has. Mr. Bush is seen as the most pro-Israeli president to date, but if a deal isn't finalized while he is in office, the position of the next president could become crucial. Another pro-Israeli president might allow for the annexation of the major Jewish settlements in the West Bank to Israel. Another Jimmy Carter might use the massive U.S. leverage over Israel - billions of dollars in annual support - to press the Jewish state into a complete withdrawal from the territories it has occupied since 1967. Many Palestinians are hoping that Mr. Obama just might be the type to break the mould and takes risks with the long-standing U.S.-Israel alliance. Both sides see it as automatic that another Republican president would back Israel, but the Democratic race is being watched with anxiety. "We Arabs want a different president, not the remnants of Clinton or Bush. Hillary Clinton's views regarding Israel are well known. She supports Israel totally and if she wins, we will have to suffer through another period of biased American policies," Mr. Ibrahim said. The Haaretz daily newspaper has been running an occasional feature called The Israel Factor, in which it asks an anonymous panel of current and former Israeli government officials, as well as prominent American Israelis, to rank the various presidential candidates in terms of how good each would be for Israel. While Republican Rudolph Giuliani, who has said that he doesn't think a Palestinian state is in the U.S. interest, is the No. 1 pick, Ms. Clinton is close behind in second spot, even ahead of the rest of the Republican field. She's seen as a steady hand whom Israeli officials know from her husband's years in the White House, and she has been outspoken in her willingness to confront Iran, a top concern for the Jewish state. "The panel believes that, for Israel, it's better to have an experienced candidate with which we're more familiar than a new face with no detectable long-term relations with Israeli officials or the Israeli government," said Shmuel Rosner, Haaretz's Washington correspondent. Mr. Obama, the new face, consistently finishes last among the 12 candidates campaigning for the Democratic and Republican nominations. Though he has spoken of supporting Israel, he wants a rapid drawdown of the U.S. troop strength in Iraq, and is in favour of negotiating with Iran, two positions that are considered heresy in Israel. Mr. Rosner said that the panel didn't seem to trust Mr. Obama not to adopt a more pro-Palestinian stand once in office. Race may also play a role too. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who like Mr. Obama is black, recently jarred Israeli officials by comparing the human-rights situation in the West Bank to the discrimination she faced growing up in the American South.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Brian S (#0)
I have maintained for years that I would vote for a candidate whose whole platform would consist of a gesture and just two words: an upraised middle finger and the words “F*ck Israel!”
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||