Conflicted/Afflicted

Perspective is everything. American Jews are largely in favour of Barak Obama for president of the United States. It's their call; they're Americans, after all, and they look out for the best possible outcomes for the United States, as they identify them. Jews do tend, in most instances, to heavily favour social progressives with liberal outlooks. It's in their blood, in a sense. Which is not to say there isn't a Jewish presence in the Republican Party.

And then there is Israel, and just as the world looks on with fascination at the current run for the American presidency, so does Israel. Whatever happens with the world's most powerful, wealthiest nation is of primary interest everywhere in the world. Since whatever the United States does, both internally and internationally does tend to heavily impact elsewhere in the world. And for Israelis the current concern is overwhelmingly Iran.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's intentions with respect to Israel's longevity in the Middle East - the knowledge that he reflects the opinion of the Iranian theocratic hierarchy, that the powerfully totalitarian Ayatollahs would never permit him to speak so openly if he did not state their position, how they discern Israel in their midst - is of vital, existential interest to Israelis.

So, when Senator John McCain professes his belief that the Iranian government is a danger to the world at large - provoking conflict at their insistence that Islam blesses their search for nuclear warheads - and must be dealt with as the danger it represents; and when Senator Barak Obama states that it is his intention to conduct reasonable dialogue with all those with whom the United States is in diplomatic conflict, including Iran, the choice for Israelis is clear.

From their experience in the geography, constantly threatened by surrounding Arab and Muslim countries, they're aware that dialogue can be constructive but not necessarily. Rabidly fanatical Islamists who await the coming of the 12th Imam, the "invisible" Imam Mahdi, 12th in the bloodline descended from the Prophet Muhammad, who will usher in the Apocalypse, bringing salvation to Shias and destruction to all others, would not shrink from welcoming doomsday.

Their ownership of nuclear warheads would only hasten the good tidings for Shia Iran, bringing them into the best of all possible worlds, one they alone will inhabit in wild celebration, alongside Allah and the Great Prophet. So nuclear Armageddon holds no fear for fundamentalists who believe it will only bring salvation for them, and destruction for their enemies. How to speak rationally with such as these?

Little wonder then, that John McCain is the hero, Barak Obama the holtzene keppe in the race for the presidency. But American Jews, unable to conceive of such incredible fantasies, sought to convince their Israeli cousins that Senator Obama, whom they promote, would offer the best support for the protection of Israel. And in so doing, they were not above utilizing sleight-of-hand manoeuvres.

A former deputy IDF Chief of Staff has unveiled to Voice of Israel radio a device employed that had consequences beyond their imagining. He and a reserve Brigadier-General and other former senior IDF officers had been interviewed by a group of American Jews supporting Senator Obama. Consequently they lifted excerpts of statements out of sequence, placing them into a commercial with the result seeming that they were in support of Senator Obama.

"It simply was deception. These were respectable people but what they did was not respectable and what they did was unethical", claimed the former deputy Chief of Staff. The excerpts of their out-of-context statements had them giving flattering opinions of Senator Obama; that he is a "good communicator", suggesting that the next president would and should confer with Iran to convince it to halt its plans for nuclear advancement.

When what he actually said was that "Obama makes a good impression"; in the process also saying that Senator McCain too does. In other words, exercising diplomacy of language when speaking to confreres quite obviously supporting a candidate they themselves did not; behaving in a considerately polite and civil manner. When asked directly whom they support, they responded that it was not up to Israeli citizens to express such an opinion.

The retired officers expressed the opinion that interviews with them were inappropriate. They were assured that the filming of their interviews would most certainly not be used for any kind of campaign. Yet there they are, in a campaign commercial for Senator Obama, quoting the Brigadier General claiming that since the Bush administration has done great harm to Israel they would be better off with an Obama presidency.

While Americans appear to be heading for a Obama-for-president victory, Israelis view that potential with great trepidation. Yet the rest of the world is holding out for an Obama presidency, for a number of reasons. Many, particularly in countries with black majorities, would be thrilled to see one of their own, in a sense, ensconced in the White House.

And the world in general, those looking in on the process from abroad with great interest, seem to feel that a Barak Obama presidency would bring greater stability to the world stage, a more thoughtful, moderate and cautious presidency. Given the unknowns about Senator Obama, that is one scenario. Another is that, given his occasionally troublesome personal choices and connections, everyone may be in for a big surprise.

Or perhaps not. It's one of those things that only the unveiling of time will reveal. Israelis feel they don't have the luxury of waiting with bated breath to determine whether or not they still have a staunch friend in the United States. The current administration, despite its caution with respect to Iran's bellicose threats, has placed American troops on Israeli soil to control a new radar system.

One that will track Iranian missiles. Additionally, Israel has been singled out to receive the next generation of sophisticated U.S. F-35 fighter jets. That the country will need both of these supports and perhaps more is what worries Israelis.
And yet even with the threat of an attempt in the relatively near future to once again annihilate the country from a near neighbour, Israelis remain wedded to their nation, their land.

Overwhelmingly, Israelis feel themselves, despite the Iranian threats, to be living in the best of all possible places. The dread negatives of terrorist attacks, political uncertainty, the potential of a nuclear attack, and economic difficulties are outweighed by a sense of national unity and civic satisfaction with the country.

A poll taken through the 2008 Survey of Patriotism conducted by the Institute for Policy and Strategy at the Interdisciplinary Center of Herzliya, reveals that 92% of respondents would actively defend their country. Fully 85% were opposed to a divided Jerusalem. And overwhelmingly, Israeli Jews would rather live in their Jewish State than anywhere else in the world.

Some 87% of Jews in Israel, given the choice to live elsewhere, would disdain that opportunity and cling to their Israeli citizenships. This, taking into full consideration the very real threat of an Iranian nuclear attack. Obviously, Israelis have learned to confront fear and given the historical background of Jews, there has always been reason to fear.

They remain confident in their country, however, trusting that the future will see them in their geography, despite ongoing threats. That they will surmount all those threats, that their determination to exist and their exercise of their right to exist using any and all means possible will result in their enemies being vanquished, their presence finally accepted.

One can only wish that to be so. More than any other people, Jews live with hope.