From the very beginning,it was clear that Obama was favored by a faction of American jews who were getting tired of the steady drumbeat of war by the likes of Perle,Feith and Kristol.That suppport is now out in the open after the discreet and decent interval of the election season.The appointment of Rahm Emmanuel,the jockeying for power among Richard Holbrooke,Dennis Ross says that a new group of intellectuals is stepping forward to assist Obama in solving the problems in the Middle East.
Obama also has the support of many powerful Jewish business and political leaders who want a different approach to the problems.The Pritzker family in Chicago,which has been very forthcoming in its support to Obama comes to mind.
I believe that this will strengthen Barack Obama’s hand in dealing with the Palestinians in a spirit of give and take.The great advantage Obama has over past American administrations is that the color of his skin makes him immune to attacks by the Arabs as a white colonial master perpetuating the dominance of the Europeans.
I am hoping Obama will recognize this and see the opening for a new day of peace in the Middle East.
So you are saying that Obama can more effectively represent Israel’s interests in any negotiations because he has a lot of support and involvement from Jewish American Leaders? Who is going to more effectively represent Palestinian interests, especially as terrorism has arisen, in part, because Palestinian interests were never effectively recognized and represented before? Is this not just making a very unequal situation even more unequal, and hence more intractable as more Palestinians turn to Hamas in desperation?
While the author is hopeful, his hopes are speculative. Your points are well taken.
What I am saying is that many American Jews are tired of the belligerent rhetoric and actions of the Neocons and their support for Obama is a hopeful sign of better things to come.
Obama himself starts out with an advantage that did not exist before.If he plays his cards right, he can bridge the chasm between the Arabs and the Jews better than any previous American President.
Another advantage he starts out with is that the American Empire and,by corollary,the Israeli mini-Empire, is at the point of exhaustion due to economic problems that look intractable.
It is darkest before dawn.No pun intended.
Everyone hopes that you are correct about Obama’s better position vis a vis the American Jewish community. But when did this community ever influence Israel, e.g., a majority of American Jews support a two state solution and have for some years.
During those years, settlement activity has continued, illegal settlements were legalized by name changes to the nearest “legal” settlement (all settlements are illegal by international law) to become a mere suburb. Each year roughly 10 thousand new settlers enter the Palestinian territories to take up residence in new homes.
Old saying: forget what the Israel government says, watch what it does, if you want to interpret correctly its intents. And by any measure, those intents remain Likud in nature: no Palestinian state. 50% of the West Bank and East Jerusalem are now controlled by Israel.
American Jews have always been overwhelmingly Democratic, and the great majority have always supported the Democratic candidate for President. Therefore, Jewish support for Obama is nothing special.
And Obama will never “bridge the gap between Arabs and Jews” as you call it (for the record, the gap is not and never has been between Arabs and Jews, it is between Arabs and the political entity known as Israel) merely by appealing to American Jews. There are two sides to the dispute, and both matter equally.
Since when has any American government given a crap about representing Palestinian interests, effectively or otherwise? Remember that team of “negotiators” Bill Clinton put together? Read like the roster of top AIPAC representatives. There was not a single person with any connection to the Palestinians or the Arab world. Not one.
This name alone, Dennis Ross, potentially spells out another pretext to peace, after the so-called “generous offer” he engineered at Camp David and Taba in 2000. Ross is a disingenuous proZionist who lied to the American people, albeit with Bill Clinton’s full consent. They both knew at the time that Barak could not conceivably withdraw a single settlement in the Palestinian territories at the time in order to make possible a two state solution. At least Barak admitted to the hoax several years later on public television (Charlie Rose Show, January, 2005), but neither Ross nor Clinton did as much. In fact Ross wrote papers about the generous offer Clinton made to Arafat based totally on concocted assumptions.
Barak clearly stated that not even his own party, Labor, would have voted to remove a single settlement from the Palestinian territories. Moreover, during the Clinton years, the rate and number of settlements on the West Bank and elsewhere doubled. Most Palestinian intellectuals today claim that Clinton (and presumably his Middle East adviser, Ross) did more than any other president to make peace impossible based on the principle of land for peace.
Don’t get your hopes up if Ross remains in this administration.
I personally take the view that the time for a viable two state solution is long past. The Palestinians would, at best, be left with a Bantustan like collection of non contiguous lands straddled by Israeli settlements and roads and defacto ruled by the Israeli Military. Apartheid by another name.
However neither will Israel consider a one state solution with full citizenship for Palestinians and a right of return for those who want it – in the same way that Jews can settle in Israel if they want to. They will oppose this on population grounds alone.
In a perverse way it is thus the settlement policy which is undermining the Zionist dream. It has destroyed the possibility of a two state solution, and a one state solution with equal citizenship would destroy the Zionist dream of a Jewish state for a Jewish people.
Sometimes there is just no option but to “love thy neighbour as yourself” as one famous Jew once put it.
It is difficult to conclude that the two state solution is passe, even spite of Israel’s efforts to pretty much make it impossible.
At AIPAC, Obama was clear about Israel’s security, and while later retracting his statement about a unified Jerusalem, he mentioned the need for a Palestinian state, with language avoiding the specter of bantustans.
If Obama acts quickly, there seems to be a willingness by his administration to catch the ball Bush recently punted to him: stopping the 40 year military occupation and creating a viable, contiguous and independent and sovereign Palestinian state.
Dennis Ross on that team would not augur well for success, as some way will be found for the Palestinians, once again, to take the blame for failure. Know any synonyms for “generous offer?”
Although,as you correctly point out, we have a great deal to be skeptical about, the realities have changed markedly since the Mid September crisis in the Superpower’s ability to dictate terms to anyone.Israel, as a client state,needs a constant infusion of American cash into its marrow just to get by.
I believe that it is the economic crisis brought on by the superpower’s military adventures that is going to make the Israelis think differently this time.They also know that when push comes to shove, the Americans will abandon their allies if it suits their long term interests.Ask the Kurds.
The color of Obama’s skin will also play a vital role in changing the Arabs’ perception of the US.
I think a new day is arriving for the peoples of the Middle East.We must push Obama to seize the opportunity and bring peace to these unfortunate lands and peoples.
And so, in your view, Arabs are so unsophisticated politically that they base their expectations of those in political power on the most superficial and meaningless things – like middle names?
For the record, I spent an entire month in the Arab world earlier this year, and spoke with countless Arabs across the social spectrum about the upcoming elections. Not one single person I talked to even mentioned Obama’s middle name, so I guess they didn’t find it so significant. They seemed more interested in what his policies and actions were likely to be, particularly in the area of foreign policy toward the Arab and Muslim worlds, and apparently they did not think his middle name would be a factor. Based on what they had seen and heard from the candidates most did not expect much change with either him or Hillary, skin colour and middle names notwithstanding. Some favoured Obama, some favoured Hillary. I did not talk to a single person who wanted to see another Republican in power.
It seems Obama’s middle name has a great deal more significance for Americans than it has for Arabs.
“The color of Obama’s skin will also play a vital role in changing the Arabs’ perception of the US.“
A typically American assumption based, I guess, on the belief that the rest of the world puts as much importance on skin colour as Americans do. And is it that people believe that Arabs, being brown people (at least in the limited imaginations of Americans) relate to anyone else who is brown? And then, I guess there is the notion that Arabs’ political perceptions are based on extremely superficial factors – like a person’s skin colour.
For the record, few Arabs, and fewer Palestinians expect any help from Obama, his skin colour notwithstanding. The general consensus among Arabs appears to be that with Obama it will be business as usual in regards to the Middle East in general and Israel and the Palestinians in particular.
I just LOVE how everyone is speculating that by choosing the “right” American Jews (or as in Rahm Emanuel’s case, the “right” Israeli-American dual citizen sons of former Irgun terrorists who blithely make public racist statements about Arabs), Obama is more likely to make the right decisions on behalf of the Palestinians.
The most polite term that comes to mind here is paternalistic. The more accurate terms are ones a lady should not repeat in public.
Am I the only one who sees the elephant in the room here? At the moment it appears I am the only one who is waiting for Obama to appoint a group of Arab-Americans to decide what should be done about Israel.
One thing that always emerges in conversations about the Middle East is that the Arab side treats Israel as a passing phenomenon and is not willing to treat that country as a legitimate power in the Middle East.
For those who don’t know it yet,Isrel is the superpower in the Middle Est.For better or worse it is here to sty and it is the country with which ll rbs hve to make peace.
Mr.Emmanuel is being demonized because of what his father said.Should the sins of the fathers, etc. comes to mind.
All I am trying to say is that we have a real opportunity with Obama and his friends among the Jewish community in Chicago to reach out to Arabs and make peace.Let us not squander it.
I guess you are unaware of the fact that for the last six years the Arab League has repeatedly offered Israel not merely peace, but fully normal diplomatic and economic relations, and all Israel has to do to get this wonderful gift is to stop refusing to comply with UNSC Resolution 242, to which Israel gave its agreement back in the ’70’s. In other words, all Israel has to do is comply with international law by relinquishing its territorial expansion plans. And I guess you are also unaware that every time the Arab League extends this extraordinarily generous offer, Israel gives them the middle finger.
And you appear also to be completely unaware that Hamas has long ago endorsed a two-state solution, and that Israel and its supporters have done their very best to pretend that it never happened.
And do you have any idea of the numerous overtures made over the years by Bashar Al Asad and his father before him, all of which have been dismissed out of hand by Israel?
And did you know that the only demands Hizballah has of Israel is that they 1) withdraw from Sheb`a Farms and stop stealing the natural resources from that area, 2) cease their multiple daily violations of Lebanon’s territory and airspace, and terrorizing of Lebanese civilians, 3) release to mine clearing organizations the map of the mine fields dating back to Israel’s 18 year brutal occupation of Lebanon? Does that seem like such a difficult thing to do for someone who really wants peace?
So who is it, again, who needs to make peace with whom?
And once again, you are resorting to the typical western imperialist practice of assigning to yourselves (with the assistance of the “right American Jews”, in this case) the job of deciding what to give to those brown child-like people on the other side of the earth. Not a scintilla of thought that maybe Arabs ought to be in on the policy-making. Oh, no, it’s all about you and “the right (Chicagoan?!) Jews”. Don’t you see how offensive and counterproductive this kind of paternalistic behaviour is? Or is it just that you don’t care?
And Rahm Emanuel is not being “demonized”, he is being justifiably criticized. Furthermore, the criticisms of him have nothing to do with anything his father has said. Rahm Emanuel is a hard core militant Zionist, and he’s also got plenty of problems on domestic matters.
Please do not misunderstand my post for an endorsement of Israeli actions past or present.
I think their actions in the past constitute borderline genocide and are reprehensible.
But the Arabs have to get rid of delusions and make it possible for their people to live normal lives where their people’s undeniable talents could be put to better use.
That means dealing with a an enemy who has superior arms, superior strategy and the support of a rich superpower.
Read Sun Tzu on how to deal with this situation.Better yet, give every Palestinians a copy of Sun Tzu’s Art of War.
Duly noted. I did not see any endorsement from you of Israel’s actions or even of its existence. What I did see, however, was you putting 100% of the onus on the Arabs and none whatsoever on the Israelis while insisting that the Arabs must do what they already have been doing since a decade and more ago while demanding exactly nothing from the Israelis in return. You want the Arabs to read Sun Zu while the Israelis continue their rape, murder, and plunder? What about acknowledging that the Arabs have made huge efforts to work with the Israelis toward a resolution, only to receive the middle finger from Israel?
Isn’t it about time people in the United States stopped living in their propaganda-induced version of the past, and caught up with present-day reality? The Palestinians have made far more concessions than they could ever reasonably be asked to make, and yet they are expected to make more, and more, and more while Israel whines and snivels about having to make “painful concessions” like giving back to the Palestinians a tiny percentage of what the Israelis were never entitled to in the first place. And in the mean time, Palestinians are expected to be well-behaved, and sit back quietly and watch as Israel continues to destroy their homes, assault their daughters (see the linked report), steal their dreams, loot their personal property (see the aforelinked report), separate them from their livelihoods, uproot their crop-bearing trees, strangle them out of their land, kill their loved ones and neighbors, imprison their children indefinitely, and starve their families to death (check out what they are doing in Gaza right now).
Since 2002 the Arab League (do you have any idea how big a deal that is?!) has offered Israel everything it has always insisted it wants – full official recognition, and fully normal diplomatic and economic relations – in exchange for Israel’s compliance with UNSC Resolution 242 in accordance with Israel’s own pledge made more than 30 years ago. That offer from the Arab League has been on the table for the last eight years, and for the last eight years Israel has given the middle finger to the Arab League, refusing to use that incredibly generous offer of everything they say they want even as a basis for negotiation. What more does Israel want from them, and if there is something more Israel wants, why won’t they at least accept the Arab League offer as a basis upon which to begin negotiations?
And why don’t most Americans even know this eight year old offer exists?
What the hell more do you want the Arabs to do while Israel continues to stick its middle finger in the air in their direction? And what the hell more do you want from the Palestinians while Israel continues its genocidal policies against them (you know, like just today refusing entry into Gaza of tens of of truckloads of food, medicine, and medical supplies, starving an entire population of about 1.5 million human beings – that qualifies as a crime against humanity, by the way!)?
And what the hell more do you want from the Lebanese while Israel continues its multiple daily unprovoked violations of Lebanon’s territory and airspace, and its attacks and deliberate terrorizing of Lebanese civilians (as reported every single day by UN observers)? And what should the Lebanese do as, according to reliable reports, Israel plans its next assault designed to set Lebanese civilian infrastructure back another 30 years?
And what the hell do you want the Syrians to do as Israel continues to laugh in their face every time they attempt to initiate a diplomatic resolution regarding the Golan Heights, whose land and natural resources Israel continues to steal?
And don’t you think it’s remarkable that the Arab League has kept their truly generous offer on the table for eight years in light of Israel’s actions during that time? And has it occurred to you to even consider the significance of Syria’s completely non-violent responses to Israeli and American violence against its territory and citizens? Have you even thought about the fact that Syria has done what the United States and Israel would never do – react to aggression by turning to the U.N. (for all the good it did them)? Have you even thought about any of that? Have you compared Israel’s reaction to the capture of two of its soldiers on the Lebanese border with Syria’s reaction to Israel bombing deep inside its territory, and the United States violating its sovereign borders to murder its citizens? Hint: Israel completely bypassed diplomacy, and responded by spending a month “bombing Lebanon back 30 years” (something that had been planned some time ago and was just waiting for a pretext). Syria, on the other hand, responded by bringing complaints to the UN (which went nowhere, of course), and closing an American school in Damascus. So just who is it that needs to change their behaviour here?
And are you aware of the history of Arab efforts to use the UN and other forms of diplomacy to resolve its issues with Israel? Do you know anything about the years of efforts Syria and Egypt made after 1967 to use diplomatic means to obtain Israeli withdrawal from their territory before they finally resorted to military means in 1973? Most likely all you “know” is that the Arabs attacked and “tried to destroy” Israel in 1973. And are you aware that 1973 is the only one of Israel’s wars that was unambiguously initiated by Arab states, and Israel was the aggressor in every other one of its wars, most likely, according to the latest historical research and analysis, including 1948 (see, for example, Ilan Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine?
What more do you want from the Arabs while you demand exactly nothing of the Israelis other than more of the same thieving, murderous behaviour they have gotten away with for the last 60 years?
And what specifically are these “Arab delusions” that you are referring to? In what way do you think these “delusions” are preventing Arab people from living normal lives and putting their talents to use? And did it ever occur to you that it might be something other than, or at least in addition to these undefined, unspecified “delusions” that are holding Arabs back?