Deconstructing Clinton: How can you help Israel

It is my suspicion that Steve Rabinowitz, a public-relations wizard with Rabinowitz/Dorf Communications, takes great pride in the quote he was able to get into The National Journal. The story that appears in the latest issue deals with problems surrounding "The Washington political press release". In it, Rabinowitz is in charge of sticking it to the press in the bluntest of ways: "Any journalist who says they never rely on paper handouts from flacks is just full of shit."

A former client of Rabinowitz' - and former President of the U.S. - showed up this morning in yet another event publicized by him. And let me admit it right at the beginning: I will now rely on a "paper handout" (by Rabinowitz' office) as to give you a sense of what Bill Clinton was saying to the women who gathered for United Jewish Communities' Lion of Judah conference in Washington. Maybe I should also note that I was actually there.

The interesting thing about Clinton was the subtle way with which he delivered quite a controversial message when one considers the audience and the general mood. "He is the only politician who can say such things and get away with it," an experienced observer told me afterwards. And he was right. Clinton had one important message to convey, and he was very eloquent as he delivered it to the crowd.

The message is simple: If you want to help Israel, don't forget the Palestinians' needs. This couldn't have been a very popular argument with a group of women who just heard the story of an abducted Israeli soldier from his wife (they heard the story of the one kidnapped by Hezbollah but it really doesn't matter), and who just yesterday heard Israel's ambassador to the UN declaring "World War 3." However Clinton - the powerful speaker that he is - was able to deliver the message in the most convincing way. Here's how he did it:

Clinton hides his true intentions : He started with what seemed to be the expected 9/11 speech dealing with "some seminal moments in time." Moment which "shape our emotions" (is this the way to talk to 1500 women or what?).

First mention of real subject in the most uncommitted way: "take a brief walk with me through... 9/11, the rejection of my peace proposal by Yasser Arafat...the second Intifada... the Hamas victory... the Hezbollah actions and Israel's response...the tsunami in South Asia...Hurricane Katrina."

The Tsunami and Arafat? That's the beauty of it all - just be patient.

Now back in time: "When Mr. Arafat rejected my last peace proposal...It affected the psychology of the Israeli people, and I think of Jewish people of the world over, and people devoted to the security of Israel the world over. The big question seemed to shift from what the details of a peace plan ought to be to how can we insure Israel's security in what may be a permanently hostile environment."

A delicate first strike: "It looked very different to the ordinary Palestinian. If they could have voted they would have voted to take the deal," he assures the crowd (how would he know, I wonder). He explains that "Hamas...won because their opponents foolishly ran multiple slates...[and] the voters thought they were voting for people that were more honest, more competent."

So what have we established by now? The Palestinians wanted Clinton's deal. The Palestinians voted for Hamas for reasons other than hatred for Israel. Wrapped in a Clintonian way it sounds like this: "It's very important when moments in time change us to try to still remember the people with whom we share a circumstance and if they view it differently."

And speaking of circumstances: Here's a story for you about Bolivia (but it's really also about the Palestinians): "If you were a Bolivian miner with four children that you couldn't afford to educate, and your body was steadily breaking down but you never made any more money, and you saw the natural resources of your country going elsewhere, and you had a farmer who was a native Indian running for president promising to get you a better slice of the pie - at least for your children - wouldn't you have voted for [Morales]?"

(Update: I mistakenly mentioned Chavez in the earlier version, as the question Clinton answered was: "Do you believe that the dominance of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and the election of Mr. Morales in Bolivia means that there is no longer any support in the world for the neo-liberal trade agenda?")

Enters the analytical Clinton: "What are our long-term objectives? We want to see Israel secure, not having to maintain a garrison state...and at home, finally, without fighting in the Middle East."

But he is not just analytical, he is also the supportive Clinton: "We have to try to force the Hamas, and eventually the Hezbollah in Lebanon...to choose the politics of argument or the politics of arms."

And to yet another part of the world: "this is an important issue for us to remember in Iraq as well."

Why is Iraq important in this context? Clinton does magic: First, he recommends the book "Fiasco" (a way to attack Bush without really doing it). Then, he highlight the message of this book. Fighting insurgencies one has to remember that you fight the terrorists and not the population: "the people are the prize", he says (and in case you haven't noticed, in the past couple of weeks this became the most frequently repeated cliche in America - not that it isn't true).

Now you see the connection? "every tactical victory has to be measured against the strategic objective of winning the people - or in the case of the Palestinians not losing them."

Find it controversial? Clinton moves right back to the more consensual arena: "if you come to 9/11, we had an astonishing moment of unity in America and around the world." And he stays on this issue for a long time, to allow the crowd a rest from controversy.

But talking about terrorism: "Insurgencies...are never defeated by superior military power alone."

Now, let's make it even more complicated: "when I went [to Indonesia after the tsunami] I saw this therapy session for kids who have lost their family members, and they were all drawing pictures...there was picture after picture after picture...of American helicopters because they were dropping food or dropping lifeline ropes."

And guess what happened? "Our approval rating went up in Indonesia, a country with a very vigorous, by the way, jihadist movement."

And that's why "We have to find ways to create that on a daily basis in every place."

For example: With the Palestinians - that's why Clinton is here in the first place.

And how do we know that? Because, almost at the very end, he admits it: "that is the major point I want to hammer home here for the UJC...Any time you do anything, for example, in Israel that involves the Muslims, the Christians, and others that is a model that people will know about in the territories, it's a positive thing."

Checkmate.