Each of the three standing US presidential candidates has developed an almost larger than life persona: Barack Obama, The Messiah; Hillary Clinton, The Wife Of; and John McCain, The American Hero.
US senator and Republican presidential candidate John McCain during his visit to Jerusalem.
Photo: Ariel Jerozolimksi [file]
And then you meet one of them in person and are faced not with the brushed-over televised image speaking in sound bites or soaring rhetoric, but rather someone who talks in run-on sentences, is not an expert or authority on all matters, and reveals - through humor and non-verbal signs and signals - little bits of himself.
That, at least, is what happened during The Jerusalem Post's interview Tuesday with McCain in a lounge at Jerusalem's David Citadel Hotel. For instance, McCain, 71, is not a young man, which is by no means a sin, a fault, nor something that should disqualify him from serving as president of the United States.
It is just that in his presence you feel his age, you sense it. You feel it in the way he looks, especially around the neck, and in the way you can actually see him think, see him thinking. His answers are not of the rapid-fire variety; they are slower, more methodical.
McCain is also a man of good humor, throwing in self-deprecating comments from time to time, chuckling easily - like when talking about the emptiness of the recent UN sanctions against Iran; or the thousands of new-found friends who have gathered around since he became the Republican party's presumptive candidate; or how he, like French President Nicolas Sarkozy, would fire his spokeswoman if this particular interview did not go well.
It was clear that in granting a 30-minute interview to The Post during a whirlwind visit to the country, the Arizona senator was keen on reaching out to the American Jewish voters, voters who historically vote overwhelmingly for the Democratic candidate. McCain arrived with two staunch supporters: Senators Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, arguably America's senior Jewish politician and a man widely respected in the Jewish community, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.
It was also clear that McCain, in one brief interview, could touch on only a fraction of the issues of concern to the pro-Israel and Jewish voters. As a result, he didn't go into much detail, preferring to speak in broad strokes about how Israel is a unique partner; how support for Israel is not only about Israeli interests, but also American ones; and how the West is engaged in a titanic struggle with an extremist foe.
On some matters of detail - such as whether he distinguished between Israeli building in east Jerusalem and in the settlements - McCain paused, cast a "help me out here" glance in Lieberman's direction, and then - very straightforwardly - said he "really didn't have a good response to that question."
In general, McCain doesn't leave the impression of a "details" person, but rather of a "big picture" guy, a strategist, the point man who blazes a direction, and lets others fill in the details.
Which doesn't mean he doesn't pay attention to details. Indeed, it was telling that even before McCain took the first question of this interview, he said that although he didn't have time during this trip to meet PA President Mahmoud Abbas, he did just get off the phone with him and believed he genuinely wanted peace.
"I met with him before, as you know, and I still believe that he is committed to the peace process," McCain said. "I understand the complications that he confronts, but there is not a shred of doubt in my mind that he is committed in every way to bringing about a peaceful settlement to this very daunting challenge that affects not only the Palestinians and Israel, but also the entire Middle East."
McCain, ever the careful candidate, did not want it to look like he was snubbing the Palestinians during his trip. And then, with no apologies and with signature "straight talk," he proceeded to lay out his unflinchingly pro-Israel doctrine.
You have an ethos about not declaring a war unless you are prepared to win it. How do you apply that in a world where warfare is very different now, and where - in the Israeli case - we are fighting these asymmetrical missile wars, launched from civilian neighborhoods, where hitting back necessarily affects civilians?
I can only put it into the broad statement that we are in a titanic struggle, and will be for the foreseeable future, between radical Islamic extremism and the forces of freedom and democracy and everything we value and treasure. The nature of the enemy is hydra-headed, it is multi dimensional, and the struggle is military, diplomatic, intelligence and ideological.... We're going to have to succeed in all these areas.
Iran is a threat to the region. The latest information is that they are arming and training extremists that come out of Iraq in Teheran and sending them back in. They are obviously supporting Hizbullah. They are obviously pursuing nuclear weapons. They continue to have an influence in the southern part of Iraq, as we all know. The influence they appear to have over Syria is very apparent; so the challenge of Iran is a very large one. And I have said we have many areas and ways to pursue this part of the struggle.
I view Iran as part of this large struggle, one that is going to require the closest coordination, cooperation and assistance - and at the end of the day we have many options to pursue.
But, at the end of the day, we can still not afford to have Iran with nuclear weapons [because of] the threat to Israel, the nuclearization of the region, proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region, the threat it poses to other nations as well as Israel. We know they have ambitions that are not just aimed at Israel, [such as] destabilization of the entire region upon which United States national security interests rest.
And by the way, how do you define victory? In counter-insurgencies, and Iraq has turned into a counter-insurgency, you win over time and you succeed gradually.... There's no peace-signing [ceremony]. There's no Camp David accord. There's a gradual reduction of the influence and strength of the enemy...
