Obama Seeks To Reassure AIPAC on Basis for Peace

Holds Firm on 1967 Borders With Mutually Agreed Land Swaps

Holding Firm: President Obama addressed the American Israel Public Affairs Committee on Sunday in Washington. There he sought to reassure the pro-Israel community after his recent endorsement of the 1967 borders as the basis for an Israeli – Palestinian peace agreement.
getty images
Holding Firm: President Obama addressed the American Israel Public Affairs Committee on Sunday in Washington. There he sought to reassure the pro-Israel community after his recent endorsement of the 1967 borders as the basis for an Israeli – Palestinian peace agreement.

By Nathan Guttman

Published May 22, 2011.
  • Print
  • Share Share

After causing a stir by endorsing the 1967 borders as the basis for an Israeli–Palestinian peace agreement, President Obama on Sunday sought to reassure the pro-Israel community about his views regarding the future borders.

In a speech, which at times received lengthy applause and at other times was met with silence, Obama provided clarifications to his May 19 policy statement about the 1967 borders, making clear that he believes the final line should be a result of negotiations that take into considerations the changed realities on the ground and Israel’s security needs.

Obama acknowledged that by setting criteria for solving territorial disputes between Israel and the Palestinians he was stepping into a political minefield, but stressed the statement was necessary. “I know that stating these principles — on the issues of territory and security — generated some controversy over the past few days. I was not entirely surprised,” Obama told the audience of about 10,000 at the annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. “I know very well that the easy thing to do, particularly for a president preparing for re-election, is to avoid any controversy. But as I said to Prime Minister Netanyahu, I believe that the current situation in the Middle East does not allow for procrastination.”

The president argued that his message had been “misrepresented” since “there was nothing particularly original in my proposal; this basic framework for negotiations has long been the basis for discussions among the parties, including previous U.S. Administrations.”

Obama did not retract his endorsement of the 1967 borders nor did he soften his message regarding the urgency of moving toward a settlement of the conflict. But he did expand on the parameters of the border issue, providing Israel and its supporters in the U.S. with details that, to a certain extent, address concerns raised by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in his May 20 meeting with Obama.

“Let me reaffirm what ‘1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps’ means,” Obama told the crowd at the Washington Convention Center. “By definition, it means that the parties themselves – Israelis and Palestinians – will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. It is a well-known formula to all who have worked on this issue for a generation. It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last 44 years, including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides.”

Obama’s recognition of “new demographics” echoes a promise given by former president George W. Bush in 2004 to then Israeli leader Ariel Sharon, which stated America’s support for keeping Jewish settlement blocs in the West Bank as part of a land swap agreement with Palestinians.

The audience, made up of AIPAC delegates from across the nation as well as many student activists, responded politely, but with little enthusiasm, to Obama’s explanation of his 1967 remarks. But when speaking of America’s friendship with Israel and when pointing out his administration’s demands from the Palestinian side, the president won repeated standing ovations. Obama made clear he will work to block a Palestinian drive for statehood recognition at the United Nations General Assembly in September and sharpened his message opposing the Palestinian national unity government that includes Hamas. “No country can be expected to negotiate with a terrorist organization sworn to its destruction. We will continue to demand that Hamas accept the basic responsibilities of peace: recognizing Israel’s right to exist, rejecting violence, and adhering to all existing agreements,” Obama said.

In his address, Obama sought not only to reassure the pro-Israel community but also to quell the political thunderstorm created by his May 19 speech. Republican politicians had accused Obama of abandoning Israel, and several Jewish Democratic lawmakers also issued statements arguing the president’s endorsement of the 1967 lines was a mistake.

David Harris, president and CEO of the National Jewish Democratic Council, said he believed Obama’s speech at AIPAC provided adequate answers to his critics. “He helped himself tremendously,” Harris said. The Democratic House minority whip, Steny Hoyer, demonstrated the distance Democrats wished to keep from the president in a speech that preceded Obama’s address to the lobby. Hoyer, to the cheers of the AIPAC crowd, said Israel’s borders “must be defensible” a statement seen as referring to Netanyahu’s claim that the Obama definition of future borders leaves Israel “indefensible.”

New York Democrat Eliot Engel, a hawk on issues relating to Israel, told the Forward after Obama’s speech that he still would like to see the president avoid airing differences with Israel in public. “The dirty laundry should be discussed privately between the leaders,” Engel said.

Contact Nathan Guttman at guttman@forward.com

The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.

Find us on Facebook!
  • The rose petals have settled, and Andi has made her (Jewish?) choice. We look back on the #Bachelorette finale:
  • "Despite the great pain and sadness surrounding a captured soldier, this should not shape the face of this particular conflict – not in making concessions and not in negotiations, not in sobering assessments of this operation’s achievements or the need to either retreat or move forward." Do you agree?
  • Why genocide is always wrong, period. And the fact that some are talking about it shows just how much damage the war in Gaza has already done.
  • Construction workers found a 75-year-old deli sign behind a closing Harlem bodega earlier this month. Should it be preserved?
  • "The painful irony in Israel’s current dilemma is that it has been here before." Read J.J. Goldberg's latest analysis of the conflict:
  • Law professor Dan Markel waited a shocking 19 minutes for an ambulance as he lay dying after being ambushed in his driveway. Read the stunning 911 transcript as neighbor pleaded for help.
  • Happy birthday to the Boy Who Lived! July 31 marks the day that Harry Potter — and his creator, J.K. Rowling — first entered the world. Harry is a loyal Gryffindorian, a matchless wizard, a native Parseltongue speaker, and…a Jew?
  • "Orwell would side with Israel for building a flourishing democracy, rather than Hamas, which imposed a floundering dictatorship. He would applaud the IDF, which warns civilians before bombing them in a justified war, not Hamas terrorists who cower behind their own civilians, target neighboring civilians, and planned to swarm civilian settlements on the Jewish New Year." Read Gil Troy's response to Daniel May's opinion piece:
  • "My dear Penelope, when you accuse Israel of committing 'genocide,' do you actually know what you are talking about?"
  • What's for #Shabbat dinner? Try Molly Yeh's coconut quinoa with dates and nuts. Recipe here:
  • Can animals suffer from PTSD?
  • Is anti-Zionism the new anti-Semitism?
  • "I thought I was the only Jew on a Harley Davidson, but I was wrong." — Gil Paul, member of the Hillel's Angels. http://jd.fo/g4cjH
  • “This is a dangerous region, even for people who don’t live there and say, merely express the mildest of concern about the humanitarian tragedy of civilians who have nothing to do with the warring factions, only to catch a rash of *** (bleeped) from everyone who went to your bar mitzvah! Statute of limitations! Look, a $50 savings bond does not buy you a lifetime of criticism.”
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?

We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.