John McCain was asked by Jeffrey Goldberg, "Is the Zionist cause just, and has it succeeded?"
It's interesting that, when answering the first question, McCain defines Zionism in the most charitable way possible, ignoring the extreme forms of Zionism which continue to exacerbate and perpetuate the conflict, both in the Israeli government and on the ground in the occupied territories. It's shameful that he couldn't frame his second answer as charitably.
Unfortunately, in American politics there is virtually no cost to punting on the profoundly important question of Palestinian national rights.
John McCain: I think so. I’m a student of history and anybody who is familiar with the history of the Jewish people and with the Zionist idea can’t help but admire those who established the Jewish homeland. I think it’s remarkable that Zionism has been in the middle of wars and great trials and it has held fast to the ideals of democracy and social justice and human rights. I think that the State of Israel remains under significant threat from terrorist organizations as well as the continued advocacy of the Iranians to wipe Israel off the map.Nice, safe Washington answer. I suppose if you squint your eyes and ignore Israel's forty-years long military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, and the ongoing illegal settlement enterprise which it facilitates, you could even defend the bit about "democracy and social justice and human rights." Unfortunately, when asked the very same question about the Palestinian cause, McCain gets really shifty:
JM: In respect to people like Mahmoud Abbas, who want to have a peaceful settlement with the government of Israel, to settle their differences in a peaceful and amicable fashion. If you are talking about Hamas or Hezbollah, which are dedicated to the extinction of the state of Israel, then no. It depends on who you’re talking about.No, it really doesn't, John. Either the Palestinians deserve their own state or they don't. Either you believe that both Jews and Arabs have legitimate claims on the land that must be resolved through negotiation, or you don't.
It's interesting that, when answering the first question, McCain defines Zionism in the most charitable way possible, ignoring the extreme forms of Zionism which continue to exacerbate and perpetuate the conflict, both in the Israeli government and on the ground in the occupied territories. It's shameful that he couldn't frame his second answer as charitably.
Unfortunately, in American politics there is virtually no cost to punting on the profoundly important question of Palestinian national rights.
Comments