Obama Served Up a Zionist Version of Mom and Apple Pie at AIPAC Conference

Not, as Jerry Seinfeld would say, that there’s anything wrong with that. In fact, in reading the transcript of his address, I loved everything he had to say. But it did strike me as funny that Obama hit every base in the Jewish game without offering very much in the way of details about how to achieve a set of goals which I personally support. He affirmed the centrality of Israel’s security as a Jewish state, the importance of American support based on shared commitment to democracy and openness, and the creation of a fully functional non-terrorist Palestinian state.

He got in the much loved and partially accurate story of coming home after thousands of years (never mind that almost nobody in that ballroom will ever permanently settle in Israel). He worked in the holocaust and his great uncle’s participation in the liberation of Buchenwald before moving on to his own personal pilgrimage to Israel’s national holocaust memorial, Yad Vashem. Following a quick fly over of missile-ridden Sderot, he pledged billions for Israeli security, a tough stance against Iran, and a forceful rebuke of Hamas policies.

Before finishing, Senator Obama even taught Torah, invoking the central principle of Tikkun Olam, the Jewish commitment to repairing the world (again we’ll overlook the fact that such an understanding of this Hebrew idea from Jewish Mystical tradition was unheard of before 1950 – why should Obama know that given that most Jews don’t?). And finally, he uttered the three words which American Jews most long to hear from a black man: Schwerner, Chaney, and Goodman. The truth is, he did everything short of unzipping his pants and showing the crowd that he was circumcised.

Ultimately though, he did not provide any vision, let alone details, about how to accomplish our shared goals. What does it mean to write off Hamas when they reflect the views of the majority of Palestinians? Why would we insist on pre-conditions in order to negotiate with Syria, when we would not require the same to enter into discussions with Iran? How do we enter those discussions with Iran, discussions which I support, given that they are governed by mullahs with an apocalyptic vision that is not so amenable to the very pressures which work with governments that think their legacy is limited to this world?

I am concerned because Obama offered ice cream to a group that needed a balanced meal. He needed to offer assurances to the right about his commitment to Israel, but he also needed to expand on how he sees the American-Israel relationship as truly beneficial to American interests under an Obama presidency. And he needed to boldly stake out his willingness to engage those who make us most nervous (If we don’t, then we should simply admit that we are spinning up world war three and it’s just a matter of getting the timing right.), but not without a clear statement of how to do that when the usual economic and political carrots may be of little value.