Thanks for the Veto, Not for the Reasoning
J.J. Goldberg contends that the American attempt to avoid casting a veto against an anti-Israel resolution in the United Nations Security Council was not a case of anti-Israel bias; rather, “American officials worried that a veto would give fuel to radicals” (“For Israel, a Lonely Day at Turtle Bay,” March 4).
This has been a stock argument in favor of the United States supporting anti-Israel U.N. resolutions for decades. It is not convincing. If it were, why did past American presidents veto such resolutions? Because, generally speaking, they understood them to be unfair or vicious. Here, however, it is clear that President Obama largely agrees with the racist Palestinian position that Jews — and only Jews — should be barred from building or moving into homes in Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem.
We are pleased and applaud the fact that the Obama administration vetoed a vicious and false resolution calling these Jewish communities “illegal.” However, we cannot but be mindful of the fact that it did so only after working hard to secure Arab agreement to another, only somewhat less vicious and false statement, declaring them illegitimate — and which it would have sincerely supported.
MORTON A. KLEIN
National President
Zionist Organization of America
New York, N.Y.
A message from our CEO & publisher Rachel Fishman Feddersen
I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward’s award-winning, nonprofit journalism during this critical time.
At a time when other newsrooms are closing or cutting back, the Forward has removed its paywall and invested additional resources to report on the ground from Israel and around the U.S. on the impact of the war, rising antisemitism and polarized discourse.
Readers like you make it all possible. Support our work by becoming a Forward Member and connect with our journalism and your community.
— Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO
