In the political minefield that is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the issue of Jerusalem hangs like a hornet's nest on a limb over a pile of unexploded ordnance. That's why many people caught their breath recently when Sen. Barack Obama, fresh from securing the Democratic nomination, walked through that field and stood face to face with the humming problem. Obama grabbed the Jerusalem hornet's nest and shook it hard. Or at least it seemed that way for about 24 hours.
Speaking before the annual gathering of AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby, Obama reassured Israel supporters that he was ''speaking from my heart, and as a true friend of Israel.'' That was no surprise. Support for Israel in the United States is bipartisan, with differences over the details of specific issues. Only a minority in today's Washington would disagree with Obama's vow that, ''The bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable today, tomorrow and forever.'' The status of Jerusalem, however, is a different matter.
Jews refer to Israel as their eternal capital. But Palestinians, too, say they want the city as the capital of a future Palestinian state. No issue is more emotionally charged. For Israeli politicians, talking about the status of Jerusalem is the riskiest of propositions.
That's why an electric charge rushed through the audience when Obama declared, ``Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel -- and it must remain undivided.''
Suddenly, Obama, the candidate of moderation, was standing for a long-held dream of the Jewish people, a dream that many have relinquished as unrealistic. Obama was taking a position to the right of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who has said that Palestinians will have sovereignty over some neighborhoods of Jerusalem. He appeared more hawkish than President Bush, whose spokesman reiterated the administration's position that Jerusalem's future is ``up to the parties.''
Obama sounded tough on Iran as well, declaring, ``Let there be no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel. Sometimes there are no alternatives to confrontation.''
Has Obama been a closet hawk all along, or was there something else inspiring his inner tough guy?
Only the candidate himself knows the truth about his feelings and beliefs. But there is little question that his speech helped him build credibility with Jewish and non-Jewish supporters of Israel.
There is also no question that the speech angered Palestinians. Some observers say that was the real reason for the Jerusalem line.
Not all support is good news to a candidate. When Ahmed Yousef, a leader of the militant Hamas, told a reporter that Hamas wants Obama to win, John McCain rushed to note the Hamas ''endorsement'' of Obama. Following Obama's words on Jerusalem, Hamas said it doesn't really matter who wins in the U.S. race -- nothing will change. Others, too, reacted angrily at Obama. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said ``the statement is totally rejected.''
Within 24 hours, Obama had to either clarify or retract that statement. What he meant, he said, was that Jerusalem ''as a practical matter,'' should never be divided, physically, with barricades and barbed wire. But he said it's up to the parties to negotiate, ``and Jerusalem will be part of those negotiations.''
Supporters say this has been Obama's position all along. Critics say he is trying to have it both ways. Others go further, saying they recognize the familiar stench of dishonest political manipulation.
Interestingly, Israelis did not seem particularly excited by Obama's statement on Jerusalem. Israelis say they have heard many promises before, and Jerusalem has long been in the words of those trying to seduce them. The U.S. Embassy in Israel stands in front of the beach in Tel Aviv, not in Jerusalem, the country's capital and seat of government, as it does in every other country in the world. Politicians have repeatedly promised to move it. Once in power, the feared political fallout makes the former candidates forget some of their promises.
Obama's speech left large numbers of Israel supporters feeling that the Democratic candidate genuinely shares what is today's consensus in American politics that, as he put it, ''Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us.'' What is less clear is why exactly he decided to shake up the Jerusalem hornets' nest.
Frida Ghitis writes about global affairs.
