|
Danny Ayalon
Danny Ayalon served as Israel's Ambassador to the United States from July 2002 to November 2006. He played a role in securing the agreement for $10 billion in U.S. grants and loan guarantees to Israel; the Roadmap to Peace; the historic Exchange of Letters between President Bush and PM Ariel Sharon, and the bilateral trade that reached $20 billion and another $10 billion in investment.
From 1997-2002, prior to his appointment to the United States, Ayalon served as Foreign Policy Advisor to prime ministers Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, and as Chief Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. As a member of Israel's Foreign Service, from 1989 to 1997, he represented Israel as a Consul in Panama and as a Member of Israel's Permanent Mission to the UN. Before entering the public service, Ayalon worked in the private sector as a senior financial executive (more bio here).
Ayalon is now cochairman of Nefesh B'Nefesh, an organization dedicated to "substantially increase the number of future olim" (Jewish immigrants to Israel).
Readers can send questions to rosnersdomain@haaretz.co.il.
Dear Mr. Ayalon,
How do you define a president that's good for Israel? Was Clinton good? is Bush good? how can they both be good with such different policies?
Thank you
Boaz Levron
The friendship and alliance between the U.S and Israel is strong and deeply rooted, both politically and institutionally. It is based on shared values, common interests and also similar national ethos. This friendship transcends party lines, different political ideologies and personalities. The difference, in my mind, between Bush and Clinton is only in timing. Both presidents pursued the same goals for Israel and the Middle East. However, Bush benefited from Clinton's experience in Camp David 2000 and realized Arafat was no good. Also, Sept. 11th affected American policies towards the entire Middle East region on a bi-partisan basis.
A good president for Israel is a good president for the United States; one who deeply understands geo-politics and history and how they influence events and our security and the well-being of the free-world today. The president of the United States, as the leader of the free world, must understand the responsibilities and challenges that face us all. This person must be wise and courageous, recognizing the complexity of situations, and understanding the ramifications of action and inaction on the lives and security and freedom of everyone in our world.
Danny
Dear Ambassador Ayalon,
Why do you think Israelis see President Bush as a friend even though in his term the peace process was neglected and the threat from Iran was becoming even more visible?
Thank you for your comments.
Avi L.
London
President Bush is a friend and a very wise and courageous leader. He dedicated his two terms to defend and protect the values and interests of the free world against ruthless and senseless Terror and Hatred,even when it was not "popular" to do.He did not neglect the peace process-- Arafat did as former President Clinton also declared. Let us all hope that the 'Annapolis Process'- initiated and supported by Bush, will result in a real progress towards Peace Security and Prosperity for all peoples of the Middle East.
Dear Ambassador,
What gives you the right to intervene in the political process here in America. We don't tell you what Party to elect, why won't you leave us to do our own thinking and choose our leaders without your advice?
This is one of the things that make Americans question Israel's friendship.
Thank you,
Robert Hammer
With all due respect I ask you to read my article, you will realize then that I did not in any way or shape made judgements about any of the candidates-Senator Obama included. Furthermore I never even remotely made any recommendations for who the American People should vote--This is not for me to do and I never will intervene in a political process outside my own country.
Danny,
Your answer requires a quick follow up:
1. What would be your main concerns when it comes to this specific candidacy?
2. Did you get some of the answers in the time that has passed since you published the article?
3. What would you say, for example, to Jewish American leaders who just wrote that "Barack Obama's friendship with Israel is clear and unwavering despite the vicious and fallacious emails circulating the Internet". Are they wrong?
Best
Rosner
My specific concern is his policy towards Iran.
On one hand he describes the Ayatollah's regime in Tehran as Hitler-like and on the other he calls for negotiations with them. What needs to be clarified is:
1. What does he expect to achieve in negotiations with "evil"?
2. Why does he think talking to "Hitler" can succeed?
3. What would be on the agenda?
4. How would such negotiations be conducted in terms of timeline and consequence of failure.
Best,
Danny
Dear Danny,
An article you wrote about the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama and its implications for Israel has stirred a lot of debate. Let me ask you this: What exactly did you mean when you wrote that "on the two occasions that I met with the Senator, he proved himself as a polite, inquisitive and energetic politician. Yet, I was left with the impression that he was not entirely forthright with his thinking". Do you think the senator is not revealing his true feelings regarding Israel?
Best
Rosner
I am not a mind reader so I can not discuss "true feelings" of anyone but myself. In my meetings with Senator Obama I simply came out knowing nothing on his world view or specific issues concerning Israel and the Middle East. These were very nice meetings where I did most of the talking, answering his many good questions; however he was sparse with answers to mine. So all I meant was that a candidate's views (any candidate) should be spelled out.
Best,
Danny
|
