semitism.net

This is from the JTA report on the National Jewish Democratic Council forum. All the Democractic candidates addressed Jewish leaders and donors on foreign policy issues.

It was a sharp turnaround from the Democratic message in 2004 – at least when that message was aimed at Jewish voters, who were believed at the time to be happy with President Bush’s strongly pro-Israel tilt. The Democratic pitch four years ago: We can be just as pro-Israel as Bush, but domestic policy counts as well….

There was… agreement… on the need to engage with Iran, while not counting out the military option to force that country to come clean on its nuclear program; the need for U.S. energy independence and distance from Saudi Arabia; and rejection of any attempt to force Israel to deal with Hamas, the terrorist group leading the Palestinian Authority government.

Only Obama said he expected movement from Israel toward peace.

“It is in the interests of Israel to establish peace in the Middle East,” he said. “It cannot be done at the price of compromising Israel’s security, and the United States government and an Obama presidency cannot ask Israel to take risks with respect to its security. But it can ask Israel to say that it is still possible for us to allow more than just this status quo of fear, terror, division. That can’t be our long-term aspiration.”

Obama seems to be leaving himself some leeway to challenge Israel if it takes positions that he sees as an impediment to peace.

The fact that he’s willing to risk losing some Jewish support to lay the groundwork for this also suggests that he’s thinking beyond the campaign to the goals his administration wants to achieve; and that an Israeli-Palestinian peace process may be an important one.