Schumer Is Only Liberal When It's Convenient

Israel has imposed and continued a blockade of supplies going to Gaza. They claim they are doing this to stop the infiltration of weapons into the Palestinian area, but that's just not true. If that's all they wanted to do they could check shipments into Gaza for weapons and let all shipments that don't contain weapons through. That's not what they are doing. They are also refusing to allow many food, medicines and building supplies into Gaza -- things that could not possibly be used as a weapon.

The truth is that this blockade is not for defensive purposes. The blockade is purely for political purposes. Israel is very unhappy that the Palestinians elected Hamas leaders to govern them (as was their right under democratic principles). Israel doesn't want to have to negotiate with Hamas, who will be much tougher in negotiations than some other Palestinians. That's one reason Israel has refused to return to the negotiating table. And it's the main reason for the blockade.

The blockade is an attempt to punish Gaza for electing leaders that Israel doesn't like and an attempt to starve them into submission (so they will do what Israel wants them to do). And although Israel denies it, the Palestinians are being starved (and denied basic medical care). The United Nations has declared this to be true and condemned Israel for it.

Sadly, one of the most famous liberals in the United States cannot see this. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-New York) seems to think that Israel cannot do any wrong, especially against the Palestinians. When it comes to Israel, Schumer (pictures) just tosses his liberal principles right out of the window. Listen to what Schumer told the Orthodox Union last Wednesday:

"The Palestinian people still don't believe in the Jewish state, in a two state solution. . .The boycott of Gaza to me has another purpose -- obviously the first purpose is to prevent Hamas from getting weapons by which they will use to hurt Israel -- but the second is actually to show the Palestinians that when there's some moderation and cooperation, they can have an economic advancement. . .And to me, since the Palestinians in Gaza elected Hamas, while certainly there should be humanitarian aid and people not starving to death, to strangle them economically until they see that's not the way to go makes sense."

There is so much wrong with that statement. First, it is just not true that the Palestinians do not believe in a two state solution. A recent independent poll shows that 74% of Palestinians (and 78% of Israelis) believe in a two state solution and are willing to live peacefully beside the state of Israel. Schumer is just repeating a very old lie to justify his own view (and that of the Israeli government). Nearly as many Palestinians want a two state solution as Israelis.

Second, although he says he doesn't want any food or medical supplies (humanitarian aid) to be denied, the fact that he supports the blockade as a way to "strangle them economically" shows that is not true. Schumer has to be well aware that the United Nations agency in charge of helping the Palestinians says the blockade has created a humanitarian crises in Gaza and "about 70% of Gazans live on less than $1 a day, 75% rely on food aid (which is inadequate), and 60% have no daily access to water." This is indefensible.

Third, it is simply wrong for a country to try and starve another country, region or province into political submission (or a group of people within the country). It is morally wrong to use food, medical aid and other critical supplies as political weapons. I believe Israel has the right to self-defense, but neither it (nor any other country) has the right to starve people into submitting to any political idea.

Schumer would not think this was OK for any other country to do. Why then does he deny his own liberal principles when it comes to Israel? If this is morally correct for Israel to do, why wouldn't it be morally correct for any other country? Schumer's liberal credentials seem to only be in effect when they are convenient, and that's just not good enough.