Louisville diary: Is there a problem between Israel and the Democratic Party?

It was relatively quiet at the office of congressman John Yarmuth on the morning before Election Day. It is the office of a Democratic candidate that is confident in his victory today. His main task during the campaign, he tells me, was to assist the party’s other candidates in Kentucky and in the Louisville area. With some he hopes to succeed; about others he has the obvious doubts. Yarmuth’s district has become markedly progressive, and the congressman relies on his record and his ties to the community on his way to the expected victory. He is especially proud of the percentage of African-Americans that vote in the district – for him, of course. They are “empowered”, he says, and are well aware of their ability to decide an election.

I first met with Yarmuth eight years ago, when he first ran for office in Washington. The day I spent with him on the campaign trail was all in black neighborhoods, so I can testify to the effort he put early on in this community. Back then, he was relatively shy when I asked him about Israel. Yarmuth is Jewish, and that aroused my parochial interest in his views on this topic. But he was reluctant to say much, half apologizing for the fact that he had visited the country just once.

He is not as shy today when I ask him about Israel, and he has visited twice more in recent years – once with an AIPAC (the America Israel Public Affairs Committee) delegation and once with the left-leaning J Street (the self proclaimed pro-Israel, pro-peace organization) of which he is a supporter. Yarmuth says the two tours presented him with starkly different realities. And he doesn’t say this to compliment AIPAC – the problem with AIPAC he says, is that “whatever it does it goes one step too far”. The legislation and the letters of support “demand nothing of Israel” and demand everything “from the Palestinians”. The tours are also too one sided. “Democratic legislators would not tell you on the record what they really think about AIPAC”, he says, “they are afraid”.

Yesterday I wrote here about the possible implications of a Republican majority in the Senate on Israel, and I asked Yarmuth to discuss Israel’s relations with the Democratic Party. Is there a Democrats-Israel problem? Judge for yourself. You should know, though, that Yarmuth says there is “no problem” between the Democrats and Israel – and that the Democrats “believe in a secure Israel the way all American administrations believed”. That is to say: they believe that Israel should work harder for achieving a two state solution.

Is Israel not doing enough?

Yarmuth says it isn’t. If Israel keeps “building settlements in the West Bank” negotiations will be impossible. And “American interests” are at stake, he says. The two state solution is the way to a more stable Middle East.

He is one of Obama’s unapologetic supporters, although he says that with foreign policy the President seems to have a “total understanding” of the complications but “not enough conviction”. Yarmuth would like to see a president that is “half way” between an Obama (understands nuance) and George W. Bush (had the conviction that Obama lacks). It’s hard to know if his views are reflective of the views of the majority of the Democratic legislators. He is certainly willing to be more blunt than others in regard to Israel. And his bluntness merits the attention of those concerned about the state of relations between Israel and the Democrats – as it is possibly an expression of sentiments Yarmuth shares with many others in the party, even if the volume varies.

Criticism of Obama aside, he has little regard for Israeli complaints about the “friction” with the Obama administration. In fact, the friction does not bother him. He is even “glad” to see it. For the US to be able to play a constructive role in peace making it cannot be in “Netanyahu’s pocket”. It should have “empathy to both sides”. I tell him that these kinds of expressions are exactly what makes Israelis so apprehensive about the current administration. Well, he says, maybe this will help “focus their attention” on what is going on in the West Bank and with the settlements. The US, he says, has to have “leverage” and to be able to have impact on Israel’s policy. He thinks that “many people in Tel Aviv don’t know what’s going on in the West Bank”, that perhaps “the [Sheldon] Adelson [owned news] paper” doesn’t help Israelis understand what is going on, and that maybe the current friction will “wake them up”.

So Yarmuth is not troubled by “friction”, but he is “troubled by reports” about Prime Minister Netanyahu’s preference for the Republican Party. Does he believe those reports? “There is less resistance to Netanyahu in the Republican Party – maybe because of Adelson or because of other factors”, he says. So yes, Yarmuth suspects that the government of Israel feels more “at ease” with Republicans.