Saturday, April 21st | 6 Iyyar 5778


Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

August 26, 2014 11:18 am

What Barack Obama Can Learn from Richard Nixon on Israel and Foreign Policy

avatar by Lawrence J. Siskind

Email a copy of "What Barack Obama Can Learn from Richard Nixon on Israel and Foreign Policy" to a friend

Nixon and Henry Kissinger. Photo: Wiki Commons.

Richard Nixon and Barack Obama are rarely compared.  But the way these two presidents have dealt with crises in the Middle East provides instructive contrasts on the nature of leadership.

This summer marks the 40th anniversary of the resignation of President Nixon, a man more associated with skullduggery than leadership.  But in October 1973, when his Vice President was resigning in disgrace and the congressional investigation into his own misconduct was moving to its fatal conclusion, Nixon demonstrated how a leader can take command, master events, and shape history.

His example provides a contrast to the current President, whose concept of leadership involves “leading from behind.”  To the extent it involves taking initiative, it is the initiative of “avoiding doing stupid shit.”

President Obama has not abandoned Israel, nor has he declared himself neutral in its current struggle against Hamas. But time after time, he has undercut Israel’s position, in an effort to curry favor with a hostile world.

His Secretary of State tried to involve Turkey and Qatar, two implacable foes of Israel, in the cease-fire negotiations, even though their financial support enabled Hamas to amass the missiles and build the tunnels that threaten Israel. After an Israeli shell landed close to a UNRWA school in Rafah, his Administration joined the global anti-Israel chorus. Before any investigation could be conducted, the State Department immediately declared itself “appalled” by Israel’s “disgraceful” act – even though Hamas rockets have been found in UNRWA schools at least three times, and even though the U.S. armed forces conducted similar attacks against schools used by hostile forces in Afghanistan. (The Israeli 4-year old boy killed on Friday was the victim of a missile fired from a site near a UNRWA school.)

Most disturbing, Obama’s White House has recently changed the military-to-military relationship by which American weaponry has been transferred to Israel, to require White House and State Department approval. Now these are U.S. weapons, and it is of course up to the U.S. government to set the protocols for their transfer. But to change the rules so abruptly, while Israel is under daily bombardment, is unprecedented.

Once again, it represented the Obama Administration’s tendency to placate the world, rather than stand by a lonely ally. This emerges from an observation by a “senior Obama Administration official” to the Wall Street Journal:

“We have many, many friends around the world. The United States is their strongest friend,” the official said. “The notion that they are playing the United States, or that they’re manipulating us publicly, completely miscalculates their place in the world.”

In other words, the Administration was telling Israel by these leaked remarks: We have many friends.  You do not. Don’t ever forget it.

Sniping at friends to placate their enemies is not leadership. It is not even shrewdness. The United States has won no new friends from undercutting Israel.

To see a different kind of leadership, travel back in time and consider the performance of Richard Nixon in October 1973.

Israel faced a military crisis. Egypt and Syria, backed by nine Arab states and lavishly supplied by the Soviet Union, attacked on Yom Kippur. Israeli forces were thrown back in the Sinai and on the Golan Heights. Defense Minister Moshe Dayan told Prime Minister Golda Meir that Israel faced imminent defeat. The situation was so dire, that the Israeli government considered resorting to a last ditch nuclear option.

In this crisis situation, Richard Nixon ordered a massive airlift of military supplies to Israel. During a 32-day period beginning October 14, jumbo U.S. military aircraft touched down in Israel 567 times, delivering some 22,300 tons of material.

Conducting such an operation was a complicated task. Then, as now, Israel was not popular on the international scene. Fearful of the Arabs’ oil weapon, NATO allies refused to allow U.S. transport planes to refuel in their countries – even while NATO members Turkey and Greece were allowing Soviet supply planes to overfly their territory. Ultimately, the U.S. managed to pressure Portugal to allow landing in the Azores for refueling.

Meanwhile, in Washington, bureaucratic hurdles threatened to delay the airlift. Nixon took charge personally. White House counsel Leonard Garment recalled:

It was Nixon who did it. I was there. As [bureaucratic bickering between the State and Defense departments] was going back and forth, Nixon said, “This is insane….He just ordered Kissinger, Get your [behind] out of here and tell those people to move. “

Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, concerned by the reaction of the Arabs and Soviets to the airlift, advised sending just three transports. Nixon responded: “We are going to get blamed just as much for three as for 300…Get them in the air, now.”

Nixon worked closely with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on the airlift. When Kissinger gave him a list of the type and quantity of weaponry sought by the Israeli military, Nixon ordered him to double it, then added: “Now get the hell out of here and get the job done.” Informed of a delay caused by disagreements in the Pentagon over which planes to use, Nixon shouted at Kissinger: “[Expletive] it, use every one we have. Tell them to send everything that can fly.”

The airlift helped turn the tide. Egyptian President Anwar Sadat proposed a ceasefire enforced by Soviet and U.S. troops on the ground. The U.S. rejected the proposal. Soviet leader Brezhnev then threatened to send Russian troops to the Middle East unilaterally. Nixon ordered that U.S. military to be put on high alert. Air Force strike units were prepared for attack, and two aircraft carriers were deployed to the Eastern Mediterranean. Brezhnev backed down.

Richard Nixon neither sought nor received any political gain for his decisive leadership. The Watergate investigation intensified, culminating in his resignation ten months later. American Jews, who voted overwhelmingly for Humphrey in 1968 and McGovern in 1972, remained, and remain today, hostile to the man.

But Golda Meir never forgot Nixon’s leadership. For the rest of her life she referred to him as “my president.” She once said, in tones reminiscent of the Passover haggadah: “For generations to come, all will be told of the miracle of the immense planes from the United States bringing in the material that meant life to our people.”

It is doubtful that any Israeli, of any political persuasion, will ever remember Barack Obama as “my president.”

It is also doubtful that friends of the United States in other parts of the globe will remember him that way. When Iranian populists remember Obama, they are likely to remember him as the President who reached out to the regime’s theocratic dictators, but failed to support the courageous demonstrators of the Green Revolution. When the Poles and Czechs remember Obama, they are likely to recall him as the President who reneged on the promise to build a missile defense shield in Europe, to avoid irritating the Russians.  When Ukrainians remember Obama, they are likely to recall him as the President who, after the non-irritated Russians annexed the Crimea, responded by airlifting, not weapons, but 300,000 ready-to-eat meals.

The irony of leadership is that it often proves a more effective tool to win over foes than supplication.  Obama’s forbearance has won the United States no points from Russia or Iran, or any of our other opponents.  It has only disappointed our friends. In contrast, Richard Nixon steadfastly supported Israel during wartime – and was lionized by Egyptians in the aftermath of that war after brokering a ceasefire.

In June 1974, just weeks before his resignation, Nixon visited Egypt and rode in an open railway car from Alexandria to Cairo with President Sadat. An estimated 6 million Egyptians lined the route, cheering him. Sadat saluted Nixon with these words:

Since the 6th of October, and since the change that took place in the American foreign policy, peace is now available in the area. And President Nixon never gave a word and didn’t fulfill it; he has fulfilled every word he gave.

Richard Nixon was a man of many flaws, not least of which was a strong strain of anti-Semitism. But he was also a leader. The current President, driven to make America liked again, may have more charity in his heart, but he has far less spinal fluid in his backbone.

Lawrence J. Siskind is a San Francisco attorney, who blogs on issues of politics, foreign policy, law, and culture, at

The opinions presented by Algemeiner bloggers are solely theirs and do not represent those of The Algemeiner, its publishers or editors. If you would like to share your views with a blog post on The Algemeiner, please be in touch through our Contact page.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner


  • Jonah

    The media buzz in America…Obama doesn’t have a plan, Obama doesn’t have a plan. What a joke. He has plans and everyone of them has and end result….the demise of Israel. He is just roping the media dopes throwing them a misdirected statement…a deceptive bone to chew on. America has the dumbest media on this earth. They are about to be swallowed by IsIs.

  • American Jews are not only blessed to live in a country
    with the best Christians, who afforded the Jews religious
    freedom and little social opposition, but also to live in
    a country with the best anti-semites. Witness such stal-
    wart Jew haters U.S. Grant, Harry Truman and R.M. Nixon.
    When the rubber met the road, their Christian sense of
    decency got the better of them and they supported the
    Jews, if they knew they were right. In my own life, I had
    once a supervisor,known for making sly remarks about
    ethnics, Blacks,and Jews, nonetheless, give me an out-
    standing recommendation for promotion. We need more
    anti-semites like them.

  • Ilbert Phillips

    The reason that many Jews are hostile to Nixon is that he was a Republican. They refuse to look at his actual conduct toward Israel and how he saved it from destruction. Liberal Jews are sort of like liberal Christians, they are more concerned about what you believe as opposed to how you act. It is very sad.

  • Jonah

    What Nixon could learn from Obama. Burn the tapes, dismiss the charges by executive order, an investigation is something to laugh about, hide all the witnesses, eliminate any investigation claiming executive privilege. Sick the IRS on everyone who refuses to drop the subject publicly. You must punish your enemy’s, refuse to allow the media to question him about it. Claim rasicm when they start closing in. Chastise the Supreme Court if they would rule inappropriately on investigations affecting him personally. Trash the country with illegal aliens, open the borders for terrorists, hire an at tourney who will only prosecute the innocent. Start a war, or wars, create dissention in the Middle East. Trump up false charges against those that oppose you. And last but least in times of dire consequences spend all your time on the golf course.

  • Diogenes

    The reason that American Jews remain hostile to Richard Nixon is that a persistent strain of crude anti-Semitism is not something that can be tolerated in a president of the United States.

    • Jonah

      I thought Nixon made some very favorable decisions that profoundly affected Israel in a good way. Now if your worried about persistent strains of antisemitism I think a strain similar to Ebola is now being released by this White House. In fact we should rename the White House and call it a masque. Let’s take off the blinders, eliminate the smoke and mirrors and call a spade a spade.

  • nayfeld eugenia

    The worst thing that happened to the U.S.A is having
    Obama as President

  • g

    Obama has weakened his own country and the west with his indecisiveness and weakness. His red lines were ignored by a tin-pot dictator who realised together with Russia that he was all words and no action. The west is also weakened and the enemies of the USA and the west are encouraged by Obama’s inability to make up his mind. And his weakened support of Israel, the west’s only ally in the middle east and a bulwark against the anti-western fanaticism in that area is a disgrace.

  • Frank Adam

    If anybody in US and €U is now serious about keeping peace I Gaza they will tell its apology for government that the economy is still too flat to give Gaza aid but as Qatar and Turkey were lavish with support and weapons no doubt Qatar Turkey and Iran can send them reconstruction stores.

  • myra vero

    I agree with every word. Obama let down israel more then once. I could never forgive him.
    Now we would him the most, he is nowhere.
    I like to see him to go like Nixon did. At least he helped Israel.

  • Ivana Talia Tufakov

    The captain of Team USA’s present Junior Varsity is the current PO(TU)S. Next to him Nixon was a superstar. What Nixon was forced to resign over, 40 years ago, hardly makes a ripple on today’s news. When Nixon was president, car bumper stickers read, “Shoot Agnew First!” Today who can imagine anyone saying, “Shoot Biden First!” ?

  • Obama reveres the sociopath Muhammad who personally decapitated 900 unarmed Jews…and for 20 years he worshiped at the Jew hating Rev Wright’s church…and his mentor was the Jew hating Frank Marshall Davis…CaseClosed.

  • President Nixon’s decisions during the 1973 Yom Kippur War were an example of statesmanship. And President Obama’s indecision about confronting the Islamic State is an example of leader with no gravitas.