Undivided Jerusalem

Bad on Obama, I didn't notice that when scanning the text of his AIPAC speech. This is the kind of thing that makes American pretensions to global leadership look more than a little ridiculous. Nobody thinks this is a smart position for the U.S. government to take on the merits, and I suspect a healthy swathe of AIPAC knows it's the wrong position too, but they'd like to see American politicians be willing to say it, and American politicians are very willing to do what AIPAC wants in this regard.

Meanwhile, 6 million Palestinians, plus hundreds of millions of other Arabs and Muslims around the world, are watching the candidate of "change" in American politics outline a patently unreasonable vision for the final status of the Israel-Palestine conflict. And all for what? Would it really have been so horrible from a "pro-Israel" point of view if Obama had proclaimed himself absolutely committed to Israel's security and just not mentioned anything in particular about Jerusalem?

Presented by

Matthew Yglesias is a former writer and editor at The Atlantic.

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register with Disqus.

Please note that The Atlantic's account system is separate from our commenting system. To log in or register with The Atlantic, use the Sign In button at the top of every page.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

A Stop-Motion Tour of New York City

A filmmaker animated hundreds of still photographs to create this Big Apple flip book

Video

The Absurd Psychology of Restaurant Menus

Would people eat healthier if celery was called "cool celery?"

Video

This Japanese Inn Has Been Open for 1,300 Years

It's one of the oldest family businesses in the world.

Video

What Happens Inside a Dying Mind?

Science cannot fully explain near-death experiences.

More in Politics

Just In