WASHINGTON The Obama administration is projecting a new attitude when it comes to Israel, and is selling it hard: unbreakable, unshakeable bond going forward, whatever happens.
Jewish leaders have kicked the tires and theyre buying although anxious still at what happens when the rubber hits the road.
Its a positive development, Alan Solow, the chairman of the Conference of Presidents Of Major American Jewish Organizations, said of the recent Jewish outreach blitz by the administration.
There are two questions, though, that will only be answered over time: Will the outreach be sustained, and will the policy be consistent with the positions being expressed in the outreach?
Tensions between the administration and Israel were sparked in the first week of March, when Israel announced a major new building initiative in eastern Jerusalem during what was meant to be a fence-mending visit by Vice President Joe Biden.
Bidens rebuke of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the trip was followed up by a 45-minute phone berating by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, and then statements by senior administration officials that the announcement had been an affront.
That in turn spurred pained howls of protest by top Jewish figures saying that while Netanyahu indeed had blown it, the backlash should have ended with Bidens rebuke.
Worse, opinion makers in Washington had seized on a paragraph in 56 pages of Senate testimony last month by Gen. David Petraeus in which the Central Command chief said that one of the elements frustrating his mission in the Middle East was the Arab-Israeli peace freeze.
The turning point, Solow said, was the letter he received April 20 from President Obama.
Let me be very clear: We have a special relationship with Israel that will not be changed, Obama wrote.
Our countries are bound together by shared values, deep and interwoven connections, and mutual interests. Many of the same forces that threaten Israel also threaten the US and our efforts to secure peace and stability in the Middle East. Our alliance with Israel serves our national security interests.
Obama suggested that the letter was prompted by the concerns Solow had expressed to White House staff. Solow said the letter was a surprise.
Whatever the case, the letter was only one element in a blast of Israel love from the administration, including speeches by:
David Axelrod, Obamas chief political adviser, at the Israeli Embassys Independence Day festivities, and to the National Jewish Demoratic Council;
Hillary Clinton to the Center for Middle East Peace last week and to the American Jewish Committee this week;
Petraeus, keynoting last weeks US Holocaust Memorial Museums commemoration at the US Capitol;
Rahm Emanuel, White House Chief of Staff, meeting recently with a group of 20 rabbis;
Jim Jones, the national security adviser, last week at the pro-Israel think tank, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
The main theme of the remarks is, as Jones put it, no space no space between the US and Israel when it comes to Israels security.
Petraeus especially seems to have developed a second career keynoting Jewish events.
He also spoke recently at the 92nd Street Y in New York and is addressing a Commentary magazine dinner in June.
Much of his Holocaust address, naturally, concerned itself with events of 65 years ago, but he couldnt help wrenching the speech back into the present tense to heap praise on Israel.
Speaking of the survivors, he said, They have, of course, helped build a nation that stands as one of our great allies.
The blitz also has assumed at times the shape of a call and response.
After the initial crisis, a number of Jewish groups wondered why the administration was making an issue of Israeli settlement and not of PA President Mahmoud Abbas refusal to renew talks until Israel completely froze settlement building and of continued incitement under Abbas watch.
In fact, the administration repeatedly warns against any preconditions and has made a consistent issue of Palestinian incitement, but Clinton appeared to get the message that the message hasnt been forceful enough.
We strongly urge President Abbas and his government to join negotiations with Israel now, she told the Center for Middle East Peace on April 15.
She also called on the PA to redouble its efforts to put an end to incitement and violence, crack down on corruption, and ingrain a culture of peace and tolerance among Palestinians.
Jewish leaders also were wounded by what they saw as a dismissive attitude to Israels contributions to the alliance.
It is Israel which serves on the front lines as an outpost of American interests in a dangerous part of the world, Lee Rosenberg, the AIPAC president, said April 14 at Israels Independence Day celebrations.
Israels military expertise and the intelligence they share with us helps the US remain on the offense against those who seek Americas destruction in some of the darkest and most difficult places on the planet.
Cue Jim Jones, addressing the Washington Institute exactly a week later.
I can also say from long experience that our security relationship with Israel is important for America, Jones said.
Our military benefits from Israeli innovations in technology, from shared intelligence, from exercises that help our readiness and joint training that enhances our capabilities and from lessons learned in Israels own battles against terrorism and asymmetric threats.
THE feel-the-love show extends to Israelis as well, a marked change from the no-photos snub Netanyahu received when he met at the White House with Obama in late March.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates rolled out the red carpet for his Israeli counterpart, Ehud Barak, on Tuesday, April 27, a signal that the sides are coordinating closely on Iran containment policy.
And when the Israeli defense minister met at the White House with Jones, Obama dropped by Jones office to chat informally a signal that presidents have used to underscore the closeness of a relationship.
The administration is not limiting its message to Jewish audiences.
Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, spoke last week to the Arab American Institute and made points that essentially were the same as Clintons when she addressed the Center for Middle East Peace.
Our position remains clear: We do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, Rice told the Arab American group.
Israel should also halt evictions and demolitions of Palestinian homes.
At the same time, the PA should continue to make every effort to ensure security, to reform its institutions of governance, and to take strong, consistent action to end all forms of incitement.
Differences remain Rice and Clinton emphasize that the Obama administration is not about to let the settlements issue go.
Obama is also not going to concede in his overarching thesis of a linkage, repudiated by Israel and its defenders: that Arab-Israeli peace will make it much easier to secure US interests in the region.
For over 60 years, American presidents have believed that pursuing peace between Arabs and Israelis is in the national security interests of the US, Obama said.
Thats essentially true Obamas predecessor, George W. Bush, made the same point, but not with the emphasis of Obama.
JEWISH leaders said they would closely watch the aftermath of next months visit to Washington by Abbas, when the sides are expected to announce the resumption of talks.
The nitty-gritty of the talks may yet derail the new good feelings; how that works depends on communications, said William Daroff, who heads the Washington office of the Jewish Federations of North America.
This charm offensive is part of a prefatory way of setting up the communications so that when we get to proximity talks we will all move forward instead, he said.
Critical to that success was listening, said Nathan Diament, head of the Orthodox Unions Washington office.
Too many of the tensions of the past months have been generated by a lack of communication, Diament said. But just as important is for the administration to talk with, not just at, the community. The president benefits from having more input inform his policy choices.
