The Obama administration appears to be moving toward a shift in its relations with a foreign ally, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has nothing to say. White House officials have been suggesting the United States may not continue support Israel from charges and attacks by international bodies like the United Nations. Over the years, the U.S. frequently used its U.N. security-council veto to block resolutions that targeted the Jewish state. In 2011, for instance, the Obama administration’s ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, vetoed a resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank and calling Israel an “occupying power” in that region. The White House’s threat to stop blocking some or all of these type of resolutions would be a sharp break from a de facto policy in place since the Reagan administration.
But Clinton has not spoken out either in favor or in opposition to the suggested change. In an email to THE WEEKLY STANDARD, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said, “I’d refer you to what’s she’s previously said on this matter.”
What has Clinton said on the matter of this signaled shift on Israel and the U.N.? It’s not clear what Merrill means. Clinton gave a paid speech to a summer camp association Thursday, but there were no reports from that speech of the likely Democratic presidential candidate saying anything about the Obama administration’s rapidly cooling relationship with Israel. Clinton has not said anything publicly since the Israeli elections about the alliance between that country and the United States. She has certainly not commented on whether or not the U.S. should defend Israel against scurrilous attacks from member nations of the U.N.
Other potential White House aspirants have spoken out for continued American support of the state of Israel, including Marco Rubio in a Thursday afternoon speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate. But as she has been on so many other issues, Clinton remains mum.
