I have to say the President’s remarks, which were obviously carefully drafted and which the President managed to deliver without any strange ad libs, were pretty good. He made the point that his decision is not a decision on whether or how Jerusalem will be provided or any other final status issues; he noted that the Temple Mount is also known as the Noble Sanctuary to Muslims.

Also, the Czech Republic has joined the United States in recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, again without asserting that Jerusalem might not also someday be the capital of a Palestinian state.

I should add that my post was a “neutral principles” kind of post—how should someone look at this who is not committed to the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state for reasons that it would be unreasonable to expect everyone to accept? Naturally as an American Jew and a liberal Zionist I am pleased and proud that the United States has taken the lead on Jerusalem, and hopeful that my concerns about violence won’t be realized.

I don’t disagree with you, Vivian—the Israelis are grown-ups of course. But I do think there is a threat of violence against Americans in the region that the administration would have to consider. All in all, I’m not sure I would have done what the President did today, with my hesitation being purely prudential, but I think it was the principled and right thing to do.