President Lyndon Johnson meets with Israeli Ambassador Abba Eban on May 26, 1967. / White House Press Office

Obama sincerely engaged the Israeli-Palestinian peace process early in his term, but his latest speech at the United Nations suggests that he is acquiescing to Israeli interests. There is rich precedence for Obama’s behavior starting in June 1967, when Israel took its current form.

In declassified recordings throughout the 1967 Israeli-Arab conflict, President Johnson balances contradictory foreign and domestic pressures. This struggle is reflected in his five principles for peace introduced at the United Nations. The first is recognizing Israel. The fifth principal, territorial integrity, receives particular attention from Arab leaders, but Israeli interests force Johnson to allow for a Jerusalem exception. He suggests that Israel is not after Egyptian and Syrian territory, but “on Jordan, they hope that’s negotiable. This little area [Jerusalem]….I think that we have some chance on it.” Dean Rusk warned Abba Eban that mishandling Jerusalem could create “strong anti-Israel feeling in the United States,” but Johnson seemed more concerned about a pro-Israel backlash and didn’t press the issue.
Johnson ultimately succumbed to congressional pressure by authorizing the largest arms deal to Israel at that time, initiating what has become emblematic of the U.S.-Israeli relationship. Obama must deconstruct this historic dynamic and ask himself: is this really in our best interest?

Source: David Johnson, Robert. “Lyndon Johnson and Israel: The Secret Presidential Recordings.” Tel Aviv University, July 2008.