Obama: An Honest Broker?

Barack is losing support among many of this nation's leading progressives following his address on June 4, 2008, before the AIPAC policy conference (for example, see Chris Hedges' article on www.truthdig.com entitled "The Iran Trap" and subsequent reader comments). Barack appeared to indulge in some saber rattling toward Iran during his speech as well as making a radical statement that Jerusalem must remain Israel's "undivided" capital.

Many of us do not understand where that statement came from, especially considering the fact that Jerusalem is one of the six negotiating points between Israel and the Palestinians and that the rest of the world knows it. (Of course, he got cheers and a standing ovation.) Is it obligatory for politicians to outdo themselves in creativity when they come before these advocates of Israel? And did he really mean it?

While the firing of kasham rockets by the Palestinians is unacceptable, so is Israel's expansion of settlements and new construction in the occupied territories. Israelis are rapidly trying to change the facts on the ground in the face of negotiations, and this includes within East Jerusalem, what the Palestinians hope will be their capital. It will take two trustworthy parties for Israel and an emerging Palestine to achieve the status both desire and deserve. America must be an honest broker between the two. This is not evidenced in Barack's deja vu-type statements regarding Palestinian terrorism with no parallel statement about Israel fulfilling its obligations under the so-called "road map".

Yet, I am afraid that damage has been done since the AIPAC conference, for that speech shot around the world faster than a kasham rocket. Barack will not be starting from his own "Stage 1" but rather starting within an atmosphere of anxiety and suspicion in the entire Middle East aroused by his speech. This is unfortunate.

We all want to believe the best about Barack Obama, but doubts have surfaced. I believe firmly that Barack will have to address this with progressives before their support wanes. Again, this would be unfortunate and perhaps even consequential for the general election.

I suppose the question mut be: Does Barack Obama need us progressives? I certainly hope so. I for one would be sad to see what one popular speaker said at the recent media reform conference in Milwakee, that Barack is but a blank slate upon which we are all projecting our hopes and dreams. In this case, it's a hope and dream of peace of which our reward will be a future of greater security.

Thus, we need clarification. Or should we assume that we all ready got it?