Anyone who has spent time among diplomats knows that they are precise in their use of language. Indeed, diplomatic jargon is a kind of code.

This is why Israelis were so shocked when Vice President Biden issued a statement using the word “condemn” in regard to an Israeli announcement of plans to build denser housing in a Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem. Biden might have expressed “concern” (although the Israelis thought they had the Obama administration’s consent for home construction in Jerusalem, as opposed to the West Bank where all construction has been suspended). But pronouncing the word “condemn” was bound to lead to a crisis in bilateral relations. Biden and his advisers must have known that.

In his interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier, President Obama attempted to leave the impression that his administration is at least even-handed. He told Baier that “when there were riots by the Palestinians against a synagogue that had been reopened, we condemned them in the same way.”

However, as Jennifer Rubin points out here and here, that’s simply not true:

On March 16 (the day to which the president refers), the State Department spokesman had this to say: “As we said yesterday, we are concerned about statements that could potentially risk incitement because we recognize that there’s a great deal of tension in the region right now.”…
So where has the U.S. “condemned” the Palestinian violence? Not in any public briefing or statement so far.
Even if we did hold the Palestinians to the same standard as we do Israel, is a housing announcement concerning the Israeli capital really equivalent to a call to violence? That’s the question being ignored.

The Obama administration did not even “condemn” last week’s naming of a square in the West Bank for a terrorist who slaughtered Israeli women and children, as well as an American. My NRO column today discusses this, and what should be the obvious reason that no peace process can succeed at present.