The ad in question spends a lot of time criticizing Hagel but is rather short on Sestak’s particular shortcomings. An accompanying website mentions that Sestak once signed a letter asking President Obama to pressure Israel to relax its security measures on the Gaza border. It cites, oddly, a New York Times article that mentions the frustrating and overly burdensome restrictions that were then in place. It also mentions the fact that Sestak gave a keynote speech at an event for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and repeats the claim that CAIR is “a supporter of terrorism.” This claim is based largely on the fact that CAIR was once mentioned as an “unindicted coconspirator” in a terrorism-related trial, which, as the term suggests, means the group was never convicted, nor even indicted, for its any of its actions. It neglects to mention that Gov. Ed Rendell (D-Pa.) and Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter (D-Pa.) have also attended the CAIR event in Philadelphia in previous years and neither stands accused of hating the state of Israel.

The ad campaign is backed by the Republican Jewish Coalition, whose PAC has thus far spent money this election cycle donating to Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.), Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), former Rep. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), and a host of other Republicans. It has less to do with Sestak’s beliefs and more to do with an effort to sow doubts among Pennsylvania’s pro-Israel population by distorting them.

Among Muslim publics – except in Indonesia where Obama lived for several years as a child –  the modest levels of confidence and approval observed in 2009 have slipped markedly. In Egypt the percentage of Muslims expressing confidence in Obama fell from 41% to 31% and in Turkey from 33% to 23%. Last year only 13% of Pakistani Muslims expressed confidence in Obama, but this year even fewer (8%) hold this view. And while views of Obama are still more positive than were attitudes toward President Bush among most Muslim publics, significant percentages continue to worry that the U.S. could become a military threat to their country.

Gaza, of course, is under an Israeli blockade and controlled by the rejectionist group Hamas, which the U.S. won’t talk to until it ceases rejecting the peace process and the existence of Israel. Within those parameters, any aid package has to depend on external and diplomatic circumstances to reach Gaza. The $400 million Obama announced will go through Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, who don’t have sway over Gaza or its 1.5 million residents.  So the administration labeled them “a down payment on the United States’ commitment to Palestinians in Gaza, who deserve a better life and expanded opportunities, and the chance to take part in building a viable, independent state of Palestine, together with those who live in the West Bank.”

The White House called the siege of Gaza “unsustainable” in a press release, and says it demands “a significant change of strategy.” In what direction? The administration pledged to “work with our partners in the Palestinian Authority, Israel, Egypt, and the international community to put such a strategy in place.” In other words, the administration either has no idea or isn’t prepared to tell Israel to lift the siege.

But here are the “down payment” initiatives, as per a White House fact sheet:

A $240 million investment by the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) in the AMAL mortgage finance program in the West Bank, which is designed to increase homeownership by offering long-term mortgages at fixed- and variable rates.

· $75 million in funding through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to support the Palestinian Authority’s work to improve infrastructure throughout the West Bank and Gaza.

· $10 million in USAID-funded activities aimed at enhancing the Palestinian private sector’s competitiveness.

· $40 million to support UNRWA’s Emergency Appeal for Gaza and the West Bank, which will help improve educational and health services, increase job creation, and repair shelters in Gaza, while also addressing core humanitarian needs in the West Bank.

· $14.5 million in USAID projects for school rehabilitation, small-scale agriculture, the repair of a hospital facility and other community infrastructure in Gaza.

· $10 million for the construction of five new UNRWA schools in Gaza.

· $5 million to start nine USAID-funded projects to repair water distribution and wastewater collection systems in Gaza.

Eighty five percent (85%) of the respondents indicated that Israel either did not use enough force (39%) or used the right amount of force (46%) regarding the recent ship boarding incident. Only eight percent (8%) felt the Israelis used too much force.  Sixty one percent (61%) felt that Israel should not adjust its tactics to elicit a more favorable international reaction.

Seventy three percent (73%) of those polled indicated that Israel should not open up Gaza to international humanitarian shipments. A majority of those polled, fifty six percent (56%) indicated that Israel should not agree to an international inquiry committee to investigate the incident.

Recall that President Obama did not join the rest of the world in condemning the raid. But it appears that Israelis expected him to support it:

Seventy one percent (71%) disliked U.S. President Barack Obama with forty seven percent (47%) expressing a strong dislike. In all, sixty three percent (63%) of those polled were dissatisfied with the American government’s reaction to the incident.

“Israel is one of our strongest and most important allies,” Reid said in a short statement, “and the United States stands firmly with Israel at this critical time.”

I deeply regret the loss of life in the flotilla incident, including the death of an American citizen.

Israel has an obligation to protect its citizens and therefore has a clear right under international law to prevent weapons from getting in the hands of terrorists determined to target them.  Israel indicated it was willing to put in place a process to ensure that legitimate humanitarian relief reached Gaza.  Unfortunately this offer was rejected.

Israel has pledged to carry out a transparent and thorough investigation of this incident, and I look forward to its findings.

As does the rest of the world.

Increasingly, though, a fourth camp is emerging — one that’s criticizing Israel for attacking a Turkish-flagged vessel in international waters (and also questioning America’s support for the Israeli blockade of Gaza). Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) was the first to step into this thorny territory, circulating a letter to President Obama Wednesday arguing that Israel’s right to self defense “does not extend to shooting innocent civilians anywhere in the world, anytime it pleases.”

And yesterday, GOP Rep. Ron Paul (Texas), a libertarian who thinks the U.S. has no business in most international affairs, also blasted Israel’s actions, telling radio host Don Imus that the blockade of Gaza is “atrocious” and America’s support of it makes us “morally responsible.”

“Preventing goods from going in, it’s actually an act of war,” Paul said. “It’s absolutely wrong to prevent people that are starving and having problems — that are almost like in concentration camps — [from receiving aid], and saying, ‘Yes, we endorse this whole concept.’

“I think it’s just terrible, and I don’t think we should be a part of it.”

There are signs that the White House is starting to feel the same way. In an interview with Larry King yesterday, President Obama spoke gingerly of the need to investigate the incident before drawing sweeping conclusions. “But,” he added, “it’s not premature to say to the Israelis and to say to the Palestinians, and to say to all the parties in the region that the status quo is unsustainable.

“We have been trying to do this piecemeal for decades now. It just doesn’t work.”

Relatives in Istanbul mourn on the coffins of victims of Israel's raid of ships bound for Gaza. (Zuma)

On Thursday, the world learned that one of the activists killed this week by Israeli commandos was a U.S. citizen. On Capitol Hill, the news seemed to raise no eyebrows at all.

Furkan Dogan, a New York-born student living in Turkey, was one of nine activists killed, according to numerous reports, when Israeli soldiers on Monday boarded the Turkish-flagged Mavi Marmara, a ship carrying aid supplies to the Gaza Strip in defiance of an Israeli blockade. The 19-year-old had been shot five times — including four shots to the head.

[Congress1] The raid has stirred a storm of criticism in much of Europe and the Middle East, not least because the soldiers had boarded the vessel — and five smaller ships — in international waters. Yet since news of Dogan’s identity and U.S. citizenship made headlines, the reaction from Washington lawmakers has been mostly silence — an odd response in the wake of such a high-profile episode.

Indeed, while a few Democratic leaders responded earlier in the week to the initial raid — most either defending Israel or cautiously urging an investigation into the incident — none reacted to the more recent news of Dogan’s death. Instead, congressional leaders seem ready to let the White House handle the thorny diplomacy of confronting the ally that’s just killed an American.

Calls to the offices of a number of Democratic leaders — including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (Mass.) and House Foreign Affairs Chairman Howard Berman (Calif.) — were not returned Thursday.

The episode highlights the delicacy of Washington’s relationship with Israel, the only recognized democracy in the Middle East, and one that the United States supports with billions of dollars in military aid each year. It also creates a dilemma for the Obama administration, which is now forced to walk a thin line between the domestic pro-Israel crowd — which holds tremendous sway (and lobbies with millions of dollars) in Washington — and foreign allies calling for a more concrete condemnation of the deadly attack.

Obama on Thursday continued to approach the issue gingerly, telling CNN’s Larry King that the episode was “tragic” and the deaths “unnecessary.” But the president also stopped short of condemning Israel, instead reiterating his previous call for the country to cooperate in an investigation.

“I think the Israelis are going to agree to that — an investigation of international standards — because they recognize that this can’t be good for Israel’s long-term security,” Obama said.

Earlier in the day, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had dodged questions about whether the news of Dogan’s death alters the administration’s diplomatic position. Still, the death of a U.S. citizen likely puts a greater pressure on Washington’s political leaders to take a stand at some point — a dynamic not unlike that surrounding the 2003 death of Rachel Corrie, an American human rights activist killed in Gaza by an Israeli bulldozer as she protested the demolition of a Palestinian’s home.

Meanwhile, Israeli leaders have adamantly defended Monday’s raid as a necessary move to uphold the blockade and ensure that no weapons were smuggled into Gaza, which is controlled by Hamas, an Islamic group that advocates for the elimination of Israel. As for the shootings, Israeli officials contend that the soldiers were simply acting in self defense after being attacked by activists on the Mavi Marmara.

It’s an argument being echoed by Israeli’s staunchest backers on Capitol Hill.

“I strongly support Israel’s right to defend itself, and the right of Israel’s naval commandos, who were executing a legal mission, to defend themselves by using force when they were brutally attacked,” Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.) said this week. “I strongly condemn the action of those who assaulted the Israeli troops and made the use of violence by Israeli troops necessary in self-defense.”

Yet those participating in the aid flotilla have a different tale to tell. And Dogan wasn’t the only American taking part. Also aboard the ships were Hedy Epstein, a St. Louis-based author and Holocaust survivor; Ann Wright, a 29-year veteran of the U.S. Army; and Edward Peck, former U.S. ambassador to Mauritania and deputy director of the White House anti-terror task force under the Reagan administration.

In an interview with Salon on Thursday, Peck argued that those claiming the Israeli soldiers were simply acting in self defense have “got it backwards.”

“There are civilians, men and woman, on a Turkish-flagged vessel, in international waters. And here comes a group of heavily armed … guys who are going to take over the ship by force and then take it to Israel, where the passengers don’t want to go,” Peck said. “And so they pick up deck chairs and other things to fight off these heavily armed — and by the way, masked — commandos, and somehow they become the attackers.

“So that,” Peck said, “depresses me a little bit.”

Nothing shocking here.

“Israel exercised her legitimate right of self defense,” Lieberman said in a statement.

The flotilla was a clear provocation and was not an effort to improve the lives of the people of Gaza but rather an attempt to score political propaganda points.  The Palestinian people have legitimate rights to a state that is a peaceful neighbor of Israel, but those who assist Hamas only undermine that goal and a peaceful resolution.  Support of Hamas and its aims is not the humanitarian path to peace, but rather enables continued violence and conflict.

Lieberman also applauded the Obama administration for its response to the attack, during which nine activists were killed, including a U.S. citizen. The White House, he said, “has refused to join the international herd that has rushed to convict Israel before the facts were known and has apparently forgotten that Israel is a democratic nation and Hamas is a terrorist group.”

At difficult moments like this, it is more important than ever for the U.S. to stand steadfastly with our democratic ally, Israel.

The only mystery is why it took Lieberman, among the strongest backers of Israel on Capitol Hill, so long to issue his comments.

“As we wait for all the facts to emerge about Monday’s events, several things are already clear. First, the loss of life was tragic. Second, Israel – rightfully so – invoked its right to self-defense on the Mavi Marmara.”

While the majority of ships in the flotilla – 5 out of 6 – reacted peacefully when approached by Israeli Defense Forces, activists on board the Mavi Marmara were clearly bent on a violent confrontation.  They further chose this path despite two week’s worth of repeated warnings from Israel that the ship would not be allowed to come ashore, and despite Israel’s offer to instead receive the humanitarian goods at Ashdod, inspect them there for weapons, and ensure their distribution to Palestinians in Gaza.

Finally, to the extent that this act was in protest of the Gaza blockade, let’s be clear: Hamas could end the blockade at any time by recognizing Israel’s right to exist, renouncing violence, and releasing Gilad Shalit.

The Administration and Congress are determined to prevent condemnation of Israel at the UN Security Council.  In times of increased tension such as now, it is imperative that we not allow these events to distract from our main goals of achieving peace in the region and preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

The Ohio Democrat began circulating a letter to colleagues on Wednesday condemning the attack in no uncertain terms, saying the raid “constitutes an act of belligerence against Turkey” and “undermines United States’ troops efforts in Iraq.”

No one questions the right of Israel to defend its border, but that defense does not extend to shooting innocent civilians anywhere in the world, anytime it pleases.

Kucinich is calling for the United States “to redefine its relationship [with Israel] and to establish such boundaries and conditions which are sufficient for mutual respect and cooperation.”

The full letter follows:

June 2, 2010

The Honorable Barack Obama

President of the United States

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

Israeli commandos, acting at the direction of the State of Israel, attacked and seized a Turkish ship in international waters, in the Mediterranean Sea.

At least nine were killed in the incident aboard the Mavi Marmara.  Hundreds of civilians were taken into custody and goods were confiscated. Since the United States considers Israel our most important ally in the region, whose survival is a of primary concern, it is incumbent upon the Commander in Chief to call Israel to an accounting for its conduct in planning and executing the deadly military attack in international waters upon a peaceful flotilla carrying citizens from over 50 countries.

The State of Israel’s conduct, attacking a Turkish ship in international waters, constitutes an act of belligerence against Turkey, which at one time Israel considered an important ally. It also undermines United States’ troops efforts in Iraq, since your administration’s efforts to achieve stability in the region and to withdraw troops from Iraq has depended upon Turkey’s cooperation through use of its air bases.

In its violent commando raid on the Mavi Marmara, the government of Israel showed no concern as to how its conduct may affect the lives of defenseless, innocent people, its friends and allies, and in particular the United States. The United States must remind Israel as well as all of our other friends and allies:

It is not acceptable to repeatedly violate international law.

It is not acceptable to shoot and kill innocent civilians.

It is not acceptable to commit an act of aggression against another U.S. ally.

It is not acceptable to continue a blockade which denies humanitarian relief.

It is not acceptable to heighten tensions in a region while the United States continues to put so much blood and treasure on the line.

The State of Israel’s action necessitates that the United States, which is Israel’s partner in the region, begin to redefine its relationship and to establish such boundaries and conditions which are sufficient for mutual respect and cooperation.

It is incumbent upon Israeli officials to bring forth the truth about the planning for and the attack upon the Mavi Marmara.

No one questions the right of Israel to defend its border, but that defense does not extend to shooting innocent civilians anywhere in the world, anytime it pleases.

Israel must account for our support, for the lives of our soldiers, for the investment of billions from our taxpayers.  Israel owes the United States more than reckless, pre-meditated violence waged against innocent people.

The attack on the Mavi Marmara requires consequences for the Netanyahu Administration and for the State of Israel. Those consequences must be dealt by the United States. They must be diplomatic and they must be financial. The U.S. can begin by calling for an independent international inquiry of the Mavi Marmara incident. The integrity of such inquiry necessitates that it not be led by the nation whose conduct is under scrutiny. If our nation fails to act in any substantive way, the United States licenses the violence and we are complicit in it and our own citizens will be forced to pay the consequences.

We the undersigned deeply regret the loss of life. We are also fully aware of the dangers to world security which exist in the region, which is why the United States has been unstinting it its defense of Israel. We have a right to expect that Israel not add to those dangers with military conduct which all people of good will know is neither defensible nor moral. There must be consequences for such conduct. We await your response.

Sincerely,