The Michael Oren To-Do

Michael Oren, recently the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. has written a book, Ally,which received wide publicity even before it was officially released.  In this book, Oren describes the terrible state to which the Obama administration has allowed the American-Israeli relationship to sink.

It is s perhaps not surprising that Oren's book has had its detractors.  A recent interview with Eric Yoffie provides an example of the tack being taken by those who object to Oren's book.

I should perhaps first mention, to those unfamiliar with Eric Yoffie, that he's a past president of the Union for Reform Judaism and that he writes extensively for the left-leaning newspaper, Haaretz.  I think it fair to describe him as someone on the left with regard to political issues concerning Israel.  It should, therefore, come as little surprise that he would be among those taking exception to Michael Oren's book.

Based on an interview with Yoffie, shown on the Jewish Broadcasting Service (JBT),  his objections to the book are as follows:  1.  Oren's criticisms of the Obama administration are inaccurate.  2. Oren's criticism of the "daylight" now seen between U.S. and Israeli policy is nothing new and was observable with other U.S. administrations. 3. Oren's criticisms of the Obama administration are not helpful to Israel. 4. Oren's book is dull reading.  5. It is unseemly for an ambassador to to write such a book when he has recently left such a post. 6. Oren's motivation in writing the book is to make money for himself.

Let me begin with objections 4, 5, and 6 -- This is what one tends to say if one doesn't like a book.  The advance copies of the book have generated a considerable comment.  I haven't read the book, but it's clear that, regardless of whether the book is dull or not, lot's of people are reading it, and are commenting on it.  No one seems to be saying it's a  dull read.  As to it's being unseemly, I tend to feel that, if something is important for American's to hear, they should be allowed to hear it.  And, finally, if the book sells well, as it appears it might, I say all the more power to the author.

As to Oren's inaccuracies:  These seem to be largely in the eyes of Yoffie.

As to the matters daylight between Israel's positions and those of America during earlier administrations, Yoffie has a point.  We remember Truman as going against George Marshal when he had America's vote at the UN favor the recognition of Israel, but we tend to forget that he did not allow his administration to provide Israel with weapons.  We also remember that Nixon on more than one occasion pushed Israel to accept unacceptable conditions in its conflicts with the Arabs.  But, ultimately he did provide Israel with necessary support.  And, of course, who can forget George Walker Bush's Howard Baker tell Israel, "Here's my number.  Call me when you're ready (to make peace with the Arabs)."

But the daylight that now shines between American policy and Israeli policy does seem different.  Obama too slowed the flow of arms when they were most needed by Israel in it's conflict with Hamas.  Also, Israel's position on Iran clearly differs from that of Obama's.  And, here, we find advisors to the president telling him that he seems to be going down the wrong path.  There is more to be said, but let me end with this administration demanding that Israel make concessions when no equivalent concessions are called for from the Palestinians.

Are Oren's observations accurate?  Some say yes, others like Yoffie say no.

I guess we're left having to decide that one for ourselves.

Slavery In America

Let's start off with the fact that slavery fell upon Africans in great measure.  And, that it was a horrendous state of affairs for those made slaves.  That's true wherever and upon whosoever this institution found root.

But, where does America fit into this sordid story.  Let's start with a few numbers.  The greatest number of African slaves were sent to Brazil with something over 4 million slaves shipped there to harvest sugar cane, tobacco, and other crops.

The next big destination in terms of the destination of African slaves were countries in the Caribbean.  And, then lastly comes America, the destination for less than 1 million slaves.

These numbers do not give America any bragging rights.  The employment of slaves is quite dreadful.  And, while 1 million people is but a fraction of the Africans sent to Brazil as well as to the Caribbean, it's still a very big number.

The fight to eliminate African slavery was long and hard.  Credit must be given to the British for being among the earliest to seek to put an end to slavery,  Their efforts began at the start of the 19th century.  And, these first efforts were designed to end the trading of slaves.  They put the first nails in the into the sale of humans.  At that time, there could also be heard individuals in the U.S. calling for an end to his practice.  Among them was president Thomas Jefferson who was among the people holding slaves.  And, then in 1886, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation.

As terrible as its history of slavery was, it was the U.S. which first voted in a black president.  Today, we have black legislators, blacks in the judiciary and through out the fabric of our nation.  In writing this I do not wish to absolve the U.S. of its past practices regarding slavery.  However, I think it only fair to point out that the U.S. was far from a leader of this practice.  I would further point out that the U.S. ended this practice at great cost in life and treasure.  And, finally, the U.S. did not engage in the subjugation of peoples in Africa through colonialism as did so many European countries.

True we had decades of Jim Crow but our progress in race relations since then can be matched by no other country with a similar distribution of ethnicities.  It is appropriate to acknowledge the past practices of our predecessors with regard to their mistreatment of African Americans, but it is equally appropriate to commend the progress we have made in race relations.