There are many things you will be hearing from Samantha Power should she become U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
She thinks and speaks sharply, and with her impassioned style and frankly, her tall frame and long flowing red hair, she will no doubt attract a lot of attention at the United Nations and be a high-profile advocate for President Obama.
Problem is, she has a history of making statements that indicate hostility toward Israel and its backers and suggest she sees a moral equivalence between our Israeli allies and the Palestinians.
In a 2007 interview she gave while a professor at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, since scrubbed from the school’s website, she seemed to lay some blame for the Iraq War on the Israelis and their advocates in the United States:
Another longstanding foreign policy flaw is the degree to which special interests dictate the way in which the “national interest” as a whole is defined and pursued . . . America’s important historic relationship with Israel has often led foreign policy decision-makers to defer reflexively to Israeli security assessments, and to replicate Israeli tactics, which, as the war in Lebanon last summer demonstrated, can turn out to be counter-productive.
So greater regard for international institutions along with less automatic deference to special interests–especially when it comes to matters of life and death and war and peace–seem to be two take-aways from the war in Iraq.
As I’ve noted, in 2002 she suggested inserting a “mammoth” contingent of armed forces into Israel to separate them from the Palestinians during the Intifada, indicating both sides had behaved irresponsibly enough to lose their right to autonomy.
Ms. Power’s empathy for those leftists deem the “oppressed” of the world may be bad news for Israel, generally regarded on the left as the modern practitioner of Apartheid.
So while you will hear a lot from Power, you won’t hear anything like this: