Israel Always: Who would be the best US President for Israel?

They all would undoubtedly continue to work with Israel as a strategic ally... but would all continue to support the Palestinian Arabs' claims for a separate Palestinian state.

By EARL COX
earl cox (photo credit: )
earl cox
(photo credit: )
Who would be the best next United States President for Israel? Israelis are asking this significant question these days, especially most government leaders. It seems that many Israelis on the street are as interested in the US presidential election as are Americans. It is true that one can just as easily get into a heated discussion about the US election in Israel as in the US itself. But Israelis are interested for good reasons. They well understand that the US president is highly important to Israel. Everyone knows that the US is Israel's best friend in the entire world, her strongest military ally, her strategic research partner, her greatest economic partner, her top financial aid provider, her largest source of tourism, her exemplary democratic model, and her reliable religious and spiritual partner. Who then, of the three candidates still in the running, would make the best US president from Israel's point of view; the Democrat Party's Sen. Hillary Clinton or Sen. Barack Obama, or the Republican Party's Sen. John McCain? It has already been noted by the US media that none of the three remaining candidates have said much about Israel in their campaign rhetoric. Each has made just enough pro-Israel noise to think they have satisfied the American public, especially the Jewish voters. It seems that none of them have considered US relations with Israel to be a high priority in voters' minds. But to Israelis, of course, US relations with Israel is an extremely high priority issue, and one that should be drawing greater attention. First, what about candidate Hillary Clinton? Israelis seemed to love her husband, Bill Clinton, when he was US president from 1992-2000. But we can't forget that he was the one who fashioned the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) into a de facto state government, and elevated the terrorist Yasser Arafat into a de facto chief of state. He pushed hard to make a Palestinian state his personal legacy, pressuring Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak to offer the surrender of virtually all the land of Judea and Samaria to the Arabs, for nothing in return but an empty, deceitful promise of peace. Hillary Clinton's pro-Israel critics point to activities supporting the New World Foundation which funded left-wing, liberal programs including aid to the Palestinians. And no one can forget her infamous embrace of Yasser Arafat's wife immediately after she had accused Israel of gassing Arab women and children. However, candidate Clinton has visited Israel since then and she professed to support Israel enthusiastically, even condemning Palestinian terrorism. But, if she is elected president, it is anybody¹s guess as to which Hillary would wind up in the White House. Sen. Barack Obama, as a candidate for the office of US president, has deliberately made himself difficult to read, but his voting record, his personal background, and his associations speak loud and clear. Arutz-7 recently published the claim of one of Obama's top activists that the African-American senator "is currently hiding his anti-Israel views in order to get elected." This activist claimed to know Obama well, and revealed that as a state senator in Illinois Obama "used to attend events in the Palestinian community in Chicago all the time." Obama has often criticized US policy for favoring Israel and he has criticized Israeli policy toward the Palestinian Arabs. His present foreign policy observers are all from the "blame Israel first" crowd. His Chicago church pastor of 20 years has been spotlighted by the media lately, not only for strongly racist language but also for strongly biased anti-Israel statements. The church recently published a pro-Hamas "terrorist manifesto" and Obama has not convincingly repudiated any of this. Add to all of this Obama's early education in Islamic schools where he undoubtedly learned some of the lessons of Muslim belligerency and deceitfulness, and we have the potential for American foreign policy to drastically shift away from Israel if Obama is elected president. However, Obama recently made a speech before the American Jewish AIPAC organization audience praising Israel as "America's special democratic ally," while also denouncing Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. So we also have to ponder the question, asking ourselves which Obama would actually show up in the White House if he is elected president? Thirdly, there is Republican Party Sen. John McCain. Like the others, in his line of duties he has had little to do with Israel. But he visited Israel just last month and condemned "the ongoing violence and terrorism emanating from Gaza." He said he strongly supports Israel's right to defend herself and he declared that "Hamas poses real problems for peace in the region." While both Clinton and Obama have said they want to pull all American troops out of Iraq and virtually surrender the country to Al Qaeda and Islamic terrorist control, McCain has declared that he would pursue the fight to victory over those enemy forces. He acknowledged that these Muslim forces would also become an even greater danger to Israel if America would pull out. On the other hand, McCain insisted that Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas is "a moderate who deserves Israel's and America's trust," and that he is "a viable peace partner for Israel," and also that he is "the best hope for peace in the region." McCain seems to ignore that Abbas was Arafat's close crony for decades and has been identified as "Arafat in a pin stripe suit." He also seems to ignore Abbas' lack of authority over his rival Hamas forces in both the West Bank and Gaza and how Hamas overthrew his Fatah Party's control of Gaza last year in a swift and bloody coup. So, we must now also ask ourselves about McCain and ponder the question as to which way he would lean if he wins the White House? Now we are back to the question. which of the three US presidential candidates would make the best US president for Israel? To be realistic, probably none of the three would be much different from the two previous presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. They would all undoubtedly continue to work with Israel as a strategic ally in the Middle East, but they also would all continue to support the Palestinian Arabs' claims for a separate Palestinian state. They would all continue to demand that Israel give away her God-given land to appease the oil controlling Arabs, and all three would continue to provide billions of dollars in financial aid to the Palestinians. Likely they would all virtually allow the Palestinians to continue their murderous campaign of terror against innocent Israelis and continue their hateful anti-Jewish education in schools and mosques, suffering nothing more from the US than an occasional scolding or a weak slap on the back of the hand. So, considering the field of candidates for US president, does it really matter to Israel who wins? Earl Cox, International Christian Broadcaster, known as 'the voice of Israel to the world.' He is also the founder of Israel Always Previous entries: How will God handle the present-day Persian Haman? Faith or Consequences Is oil more important than Israel? Fighting Fair - What the Media Doesn't Tell You Israel rejects US report on Iran Has God abandoned Israel? Did someone say 'peace'? No Palestinian State Alternate reality Relations between Israel's Jews and Christians improving Do the Palestinians deserve their own state