The Washington, D.C. "Spirit of Israel Concert" in celebration of Israel's 55th birthday, previously scheduled for May 19, was cancelled, and postponed until December. Too bad. It promised to be quite a party. Entertainers Jerry Seinfeld and Ben Stein were to be there. So were Tony Bennett, Norah Jones, Tovah Feldshuh and others.
One person, though, was to be conspicuously absent: George W. Bush.
There seems to be no agreement as to why the concert was cancelled. Some cite political considerations such as a planned May 20 meeting between Ariel Sharon and Mr. Bush (also cancelled), but others suggest that a lack of support from those in Washington led to low ticket sales -- which the Israeli embassy in Washington thought embarrassing.
Of course, the person in Washington whose support would have been most helpful was George W. Bush. The White House says he was never invited.
Some fault the Israeli embassy for supposedly failing to alert the White House in time to get the event on its calender. But embassy officials say that's nonsense -- they did contact the White House. Indeed, the White House's story seems dubious. The event's organizers, Israel Forever Foundation, put out a press release in February announcing that the president was expected to be at the celebration. It's inconceivable, then, that the White House didn't know about the event until just a week before -- but that's what it claims. According to a Jewish Telegraphic Agency news service report, a White House official says that "we never received anything." Spokesman Ari Fleischer adds that the president "had other plans" that night.
Right. And if you believe that, maybe you'd be interested in some lakefront property in Riyadh.
Let's consider another possible explanation. Maybe, just maybe, the president -- who had no qualms about how a White House Ramadan dinner would look to Americans shortly after 9/11 -- was worried about how his presence at Israel's birthday party might appear to those who regret that country was ever born.
Is that too harsh, too speculative? Consider that the president, speaking from the deck of the U.S.S. Lincoln recently, failed to acknowledge Israel's substantial wartime assistance. I missed Ari Fleischer's excuse, but in my worst moments, I imagine him saying that the part of the speech that would have been reserved for our one true middle east ally was already booked.
I suppose, though, that it's possible there really was a communications snafu and the White House, truly unaware of the big b'day event, made other plans for Mr. Bush -- to have dinner with Gloria Arroyo, the president of the Philippines. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
Still, one wonders: Couldn't the president have found a few minutes, during the entire evening, to drop in at the MCI center -- it's right in downtown Washington -- just to make an appearance? To make a statement about the incredible contribution tiny Israel has made to the cause of democracy, a rare commodity in that part of the world? Mr. Bush could have even invited his guest to come along. How often does Tony Bennett appear live in Manila?
Let's say, though, that the president just couldn't have fit that into his schedule. If the White House explanation -- that they never received an invitation -- was truthful, then surely Mr. Bush would have offered, at the least, to send Dick Cheney in his stead. And to appear himself by videotape or -- better -- a live feed.
Unfortunately, no such offers were tendered, which may help to explain why the event was suddenly torpedoed. How can you have a proper celebration of Israel's birthday just blocks from the White House when you can't get an endorsement from the president of the United States?
Mr. Bush's failure to lend his support to the event was an unwarranted -- and damaging -- snub. As Abraham D. Sofaer writes in the current issue of Commentary magazine, when the United States publicly disassociates from Israel, we deliver this message to the world: "We don't necessarily share your view, but we understand and accept your need to avoid any appearance of countenancing the legitimacy of the state of Israel."
Such a disgraceful nod to anti-Semitic dictators and thugs -- the latest in a series that includes Mr. Bush's refusal to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and his failure to publicly acknowledge Israel as a member of the war coalition -- also helps perpetuate a message to the people of Israel. A recent poll by the Smith Institute found that 46% of Israelis think the world doesn't care much about Israel, 42% feel that most of the world dislikes and criticizes that country, and only 9% think the world respects it.
They deserve better.
So, on this one evening, would it have been asking too much for the president to offer Israelis a few moments of evidence to the contrary?
The poll also revealed that 81% of Israelis think the United States is Israel's best friend. Mr. Bush had a chance to say, openly and proudly, "Yes, it is." He chose to express a different message: "Yes, but compared to whom?"
--------------------------------------------------------
Steven Zak is a writer and attorney in California.
One person, though, was to be conspicuously absent: George W. Bush.
There seems to be no agreement as to why the concert was cancelled. Some cite political considerations such as a planned May 20 meeting between Ariel Sharon and Mr. Bush (also cancelled), but others suggest that a lack of support from those in Washington led to low ticket sales -- which the Israeli embassy in Washington thought embarrassing.
Of course, the person in Washington whose support would have been most helpful was George W. Bush. The White House says he was never invited.
Some fault the Israeli embassy for supposedly failing to alert the White House in time to get the event on its calender. But embassy officials say that's nonsense -- they did contact the White House. Indeed, the White House's story seems dubious. The event's organizers, Israel Forever Foundation, put out a press release in February announcing that the president was expected to be at the celebration. It's inconceivable, then, that the White House didn't know about the event until just a week before -- but that's what it claims. According to a Jewish Telegraphic Agency news service report, a White House official says that "we never received anything." Spokesman Ari Fleischer adds that the president "had other plans" that night.
Right. And if you believe that, maybe you'd be interested in some lakefront property in Riyadh.
Let's consider another possible explanation. Maybe, just maybe, the president -- who had no qualms about how a White House Ramadan dinner would look to Americans shortly after 9/11 -- was worried about how his presence at Israel's birthday party might appear to those who regret that country was ever born.
Is that too harsh, too speculative? Consider that the president, speaking from the deck of the U.S.S. Lincoln recently, failed to acknowledge Israel's substantial wartime assistance. I missed Ari Fleischer's excuse, but in my worst moments, I imagine him saying that the part of the speech that would have been reserved for our one true middle east ally was already booked.
I suppose, though, that it's possible there really was a communications snafu and the White House, truly unaware of the big b'day event, made other plans for Mr. Bush -- to have dinner with Gloria Arroyo, the president of the Philippines. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
Still, one wonders: Couldn't the president have found a few minutes, during the entire evening, to drop in at the MCI center -- it's right in downtown Washington -- just to make an appearance? To make a statement about the incredible contribution tiny Israel has made to the cause of democracy, a rare commodity in that part of the world? Mr. Bush could have even invited his guest to come along. How often does Tony Bennett appear live in Manila?
Let's say, though, that the president just couldn't have fit that into his schedule. If the White House explanation -- that they never received an invitation -- was truthful, then surely Mr. Bush would have offered, at the least, to send Dick Cheney in his stead. And to appear himself by videotape or -- better -- a live feed.
Unfortunately, no such offers were tendered, which may help to explain why the event was suddenly torpedoed. How can you have a proper celebration of Israel's birthday just blocks from the White House when you can't get an endorsement from the president of the United States?
Mr. Bush's failure to lend his support to the event was an unwarranted -- and damaging -- snub. As Abraham D. Sofaer writes in the current issue of Commentary magazine, when the United States publicly disassociates from Israel, we deliver this message to the world: "We don't necessarily share your view, but we understand and accept your need to avoid any appearance of countenancing the legitimacy of the state of Israel."
Such a disgraceful nod to anti-Semitic dictators and thugs -- the latest in a series that includes Mr. Bush's refusal to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and his failure to publicly acknowledge Israel as a member of the war coalition -- also helps perpetuate a message to the people of Israel. A recent poll by the Smith Institute found that 46% of Israelis think the world doesn't care much about Israel, 42% feel that most of the world dislikes and criticizes that country, and only 9% think the world respects it.
They deserve better.
So, on this one evening, would it have been asking too much for the president to offer Israelis a few moments of evidence to the contrary?
The poll also revealed that 81% of Israelis think the United States is Israel's best friend. Mr. Bush had a chance to say, openly and proudly, "Yes, it is." He chose to express a different message: "Yes, but compared to whom?"
--------------------------------------------------------
Steven Zak is a writer and attorney in California.