Hillary Clinton Wants U.S.-Israel Relationship Back On 'Constructive Footing'

[azurnoir]

Source: HuffPo

In a phone discussion with Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Clinton also reaffirmed her support for a two-state solution as a means of resolving the long-standing conflict in the Middle East.

“Secretary Clinton thinks we need to all work together to return the special U.S.-Israel relationship to constructive footing, to get back to basic shared concerns and interests, including a two-state solution pursued through direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. We must ensure that Israel never becomes a partisan issue," read a statement posted by San Diego Jewish World on Sunday evening.

Tensions between the two nations escalated in the wake of U.S. negotiations with Iran over the future of its nuclear program, a course of action opposed by Netanyahu and congressional Republicans alike. Commenting on the Israeli election, which saw Netanyahu's Likud party retain control of the legislature, President Barack Obama expressed dismay with the prime minister's last-minute election rhetoric against Arab voters and his statement in opposition to the creation of a Palestinian state.


For Clinton, who is expected to declare her bid for president sometime next month, the matter is a delicate one. Division among American Jews over recent U.S.-Israel spats would complicate her outreach and efforts to unify supporters in the Democratic Party and beyond, which perhaps explains her wish that Israel ought to never become "a partisan issue."



Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/29/hillary-clinton-israel-relationship_n_6965938.ht

[geek tragedy]

1. Seems like a complete dodge. nt

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

2. I'm thinking smack at Obama.

Probably a multi-prong attack. First, an appeal to the anti-Obama voters she drew in the 2008 primaries, and also the pro-Neyanyahu crowd here in the states, to reassure them if they back her and she wins, she'll go back to the status quo of 'America supports Israel' in neverending 'peace talks' that go nowhere, as well as a bit of payback for the Obama admin folks who didn't back her up over her email practices.

[geek tragedy]

3. Nah, it's substance-free pablum that doesn't break any new ground.

Main goal was to avoid doing any damage to her own electoral prospects--at this point, no one who really believes in the two-state solution is going to vote Republican.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. While I don't want HRC as our President, I do give her credit for being a damn good politician.

Ie, not good for the people, but good at doing what politicians need to do to win elections. As such, I think her use of 'substance-free pablum' is rare. If she's going to go to the trouble of issuing statements, it's because she sees them as helping her goals, and she'll put some thought into making sure they advance her goals, not just 'avoid damage'.

[geek tragedy]

5. At this point her goal is to avoid damage

The elites in media and our political system are egregiously biased in favor of Israel--there is no pro-Palestinian lobby here.

[karynnj]

12. How would a "damn good politician" blow ALL the advantages she had in 2008 and lose the nomination?

Granted Obama was exceptional, but to win he needed not just to be very good, but for HRC to run a mediocre campaign. In addition, he likely was helped by Edwards ending his unsuccessful candidacy before Super Tuesday.

Remember that HRC started out with puff pieces throughout the mainstream media (the right hated her, but they don't vote in the Democratic primaries. Her allies had a huge say in the way the election calendar was set -- with over 20 states on one early February day - after IA, NH, NV and SC. The design was done to benefit just one person - Clinton. Having 20 states in one day precludes candidates making their case face to face in each and every one of the states - as happens with a more spread out timeline. HRC had incredible name recognition and polled higher than anyone else.

This SuperTuesday was meant to be a wall for any other candidate. That was - incidentally her team's entire plan. When Obama came out essentially in a tie with her at that point, she was the one then at a disadvantage because he had already long before set up offices in the next wave of states and she hadn't done as much. (Mark Penn was said to have estimated that she would get ALL the California delegates with no other candidate breaking the 15% threshold. Here might be where Edwards pulling out could have helped. Edwards, himself, was polling so poorly everywhere that he likely would have been under the threshold everywhere. With him out, it became HRC vs Obama/Non HRC)

That said, I would suggest that this has nothing to do with how intelligent she is or how well she would govern. Not to mention, what it does show is that then and now, there are many very influential powerful people in both media and the party who know her well, have seen her abilities and for at least 12 years have strongly supported her eventually being President.

[cosmicone]

13. Hillary won all the major primaries except Illinois

Her mistake was taking small state caucuses for granted -- she won't make that mistake again.

[karynnj]

18. That goes to my point on how good her political team was

- and the definition of MAJOR. Many of the biggest Democratic states, NY, NJ, CA, MA were on SuperTuesday.

It was not just the caucus states where Obama did better than was expected, he surged in many of these states with primaries in the last couple of weeks before SuperTuesday. Where he did not win the primaries, he got far more votes than were expected - which translated to far more delegates. I know from political people involved in the primaries in NJ (where HRC's net was 11) and MA (where her net was 17), that even a week before, Clinton was on target to get a much higher % of the vote - which would have resulted in far more votes. ) Obama needed to both keep the Clinton - Obama net delegates in the primary states low and blow out the caucuses -- resulting in being only slightly behind after SuperTuesday was processed. (Here's a chart - http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/delegates/ )

way you get delegates was not a secret or a mystery -- and the Clintons had been through it in 1992. It is bizarre some Clinton supporters think there was something nefarious or unfair in putting substantial effort into the primaries. Obama was, in fact, in a "game" which Clinton's team had a greater say in designing. In fact, it was hubris on the part of the Clintons that they thought the entire game was blowing out the SuperTuesday primaries with many pro Clinton big states including NJ moved far earlier than they had ever been in previous years.

As I said, SuperTuesday was designed as a wall to make her the defacto nominee early in February. Obama had a very steep task in that he had to keep her lead very small in terms of delegates.Note that at SuperTuesday, she and Obama were essentially equal - and her teams tactic then was to raise the issue of the superdelegates perhaps going with a "better" candidate than the one who won most publicly determined delegates.

As said, I am speaking ONLY of how poor her political team was in supporting her in 2008. That does reflect on the team's political ability -- and you might note that for 2016, many people have been named as on the team or likely to be on the team --- not so the name - Mark Penn. It does work against the narrative that the Clintons are political masterminds - in fact a better argument could be made that Bill Clinton is a natural politician, who radiates charisma as a candidate. However, 1992 was a year any Democrat would win (Bush was below 40%) and he could run on good times in 1996 against a lousy opponent, Bob Dole. Between 1992, 1996 and 2008 it is hard to make a case (other than "but he won&quot that they were masterful political strategists. They just keep telling us they were.

[Geronimoe]

6. So now foriegn affairs is all about....

Getting Hillary elected. So what if Israel undermines nuclear talks. So what if their Prime Minister sucker punches the President and spies on US affairs and funnels this intel to the treasonous Republicans who want nothing more than to see the US fail, unless they are in charge of everything. Although we just experienced what a mess they make given Bush/Cheney policies of destruction and torture.

The problem with the Clintons, is that everything becomes about the Clintons.

[donnasgirl]

7. Geronimoe

How dare you, LOL

[Cali_Democrat]

22. good post

The stakes are high right now. The nuclear deal or non-deal is imminent.

We don't need Hillary elbowing her way in right now.

[BillZBubb]

8. Very, very disappointing.

She should have the president's back on this. Democrats never seem to miss a chance to undermine each other.

[Marrah_G]

9. Bleh

[L0oniX]

10. LOL

[karynnj]

11. Given Netanyahu's pre election comments that don't just go away, Netanyahu has to

take the lead in restarting peace talks. It also likely has to be done in a pretty dramatic way -- ie with him announcing a complete settlement freeze or Israel putting out their proposal for future borders - something they have never done.

I understand why HRC made these comments -- and hate the implied even handedness of blame - especially when the Republicans are blaming Obama for the deterioration of the relationship. The fact is that Netanyahu has lied to Obama for years - most noticeably during last summer's Gaza War, where he knew the President had his hands tied and wouldn't be able to respond (for fear that it could hurt Democrats running in 2014). Then Netanyahu went beyond just lying to Obama and lied to Israel about the US position - smearing Kerry and Obama in the process - all because he did not want a ceasefire yet (because the Palestinians were being blamed for not having one) because he wanted to "mow the grass" better. Add to that his progressively strong attacks against the negotiations with Iran. The fact that he included the P5 +1 in his axis with Ian and Yemen is dumbfounding.

So far, Netanyahu has walked back on his hateful pre-election statements, which in his mind means no one should consider them - but, they were said. More importantly, he finally responded to US demands and released the Palestinian taxes that Israel collected to the PA.

Obama has already made two strong efforts - under George Mitchell and then John Kerry, both exceptionally patient and credible diplomats. Nothing has IMPROVED since those efforts both failed and - if anything, Netanyahu's actions may have made starting another effort absolutely futile and possibly harmful to US credibility - already damaged in the region by Bush's invasion of Iraq and our constant support of Israel.

This is not a time to be implying that it was a mutual failure -- I bet mommy HRC would not have taken such an even handed tone had little Chelsea's best friend punched her in the face. There are times when it really isn't both sides. The US has NOTHING to apologize to Netanyahu for - other than maybe to apologize for enabling him through the years.

[hollowdweller]

15. I don't see anything wrong with what she said.

Not much difft than what the Obama admin is saying in public.

Basically Netanyahu used the GOP to get re elected and by doing so made Israeli support a partisan issue like the GOP does EVERYTHING.

Netanyahu has basically done everything in his power to prevent a 2 state solution, while saying he's for one and then in the election he finally came out and said in word what he had been doing in deed all along.

So really she's just sort of gently stating the same thing Obama admin has said.

However basically the ball is in Netanyahu's court as far as Obama or Clinton. He has to do something to prove himself or things will change.

[DeSwiss]

16. ''Just say no to Israel.''

[father founding]

17. Give them another 3 Billion

I think they have donated the first 3 Bill to all the candidates already.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

19. Code for more construction.

[woo me with science]

20. "Constructive" like this?

[DeSwiss]

21. Gotta keep sellin' those bombs.

- We've got defense industry CEO bonuses to think of......

[Cali_Democrat]

23. Sanders and Warren both supported the Israeli bombardment of Gaza in 2014.

Want me to find you some blue links?