I don’t like to get my hopes up when it comes to the Middle East, but reading the Israeli press, it’s hard not to be encouraged for the first time since 2000. Consider this bit:
U.S. President Barack Obama’s demands during his meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last Tuesday point to an intention to impose a permanent settlement on Israel and the Palestinians in less than two years, political sources in Jerusalem say.
Israeli officials view the demands that Obama made at the White House as the tip of the iceberg under which lies a dramatic change in U.S. policy toward Israel.
Of 10 demands posed by Obama, four deal with Jerusalem: opening a Palestinian commercial interests office in East Jerusalem, an end to the razing of structures in Palestinian neighborhoods in the capital, stopping construction in Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, and not building the neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo.
In effect, the president is utterly repudiating the aggressive rhetoric that Netanyahu displayed at the AIPAC conference. Bibi said that (East) Jerusalem is not a settlement. Obama says that it is.
By demanding that Israel cease building in East Jerusalem and stop razing Palestinians’ property, Obama is asking Netanyahu to order something he is incapable of ordering. Or, at least, he’s incapable of ordering it within his current coalition, which relies upon the Yisrael Beiteinu and Shas parties. At a minimum, the Obama administration is insisting that Netanyahu cut a deal with Kadima in order to gain the power he needs to stop construction in East Jerusalem. More likely, Obama just wants to force Bibi out of power. After all, he’s insolent and indistinguishable from the neo-conservative lunatics that hijacked our own government and ran it into a ditch.
I actually kind of agree with the Mustache of Understanding this week when he argued that playtime is over.
If you think this latest Israeli-American flap was just the same-old-same-old tiff over settlements, then you’re clearly not paying attention — which is how I’d describe a lot of Israelis, Arabs and American Jews today.
This tiff actually reflects a tectonic shift that has taken place beneath the surface of Israel-U.S. relations. I’d summarize it like this: In the last decade, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process — for Israel — has gone from being a necessity to a hobby. And in the last decade, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process — for America — has gone from being a hobby to a necessity. Therein lies the problem.
What he means is that Israel has done such a good job of stopping terrorism that they feel like they can live with the status quo, which includes a non-stop theft of Palestinian land with no end in sight. Meanwhile, the Americans have finally decided that Israel is a national security burden and that we cannot allow them to go on stealing land while pretending to be interested in peace.
Where Friedman is particularly correct is in his assessment that Israel is feeling emboldened after eight years of Bush. Look at their prime minister. He comes to our capital, knowing that he’s already in the doghouse, and tells us that he owns all of Jerusalem and that we can shove it? They are so used to us backing down that they don’t seem to understand what is going on right now. But, hey, I feel the same way.
Maybe this is all William Ayers’s fault.
Also, did you see this?:
Bleh, forgot the link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8591714.stm
I didn’t see this news in your articles.
If they go that route, I’d like to see the US go to the IAEA and ask them to investigate the Israeli nuclear program. Radioactive fireworks!
Interesting idea. But I don’t think Israel is party to the non-proliferation treaty but maintains “Israel has a long-standing policy of deliberate ambiguity”. The leverage that the world has over Iran is that it is a signatory to the treaty, and so is North Korea.
Maybe a demand that Israel sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty would be the next step. After all, Obama just signed a new START treaty with Russia. A good time to push this would be around the signing in Prague.
My thought last week was that at some point Obama reminds Netayahu that US military aid is not endless, considering the deficits that the US is running.
You are right. Israel has never signed the non-proliferation treaty, and has consistently refused any level of accountability. That, of course, makes its sanctimonious attitude toward Iran especially hypocritical, and even more galling.
Hypocrisy has always been an element of statecraft.
Why should Israel be immune?
I’m sure Israel’s nukes were included in the Russia/USA dialog. I am dying to see what shakes out.
Maybe, but they have certainly always been unmentionable in any public way so far.
I suspect what has been made public is only the tip….
It’s like children’s magic: cover your eyes and you’re not there. This is official US government policy too: don’t call Israel on its nuclear weapons and they’re not there. Big US policy bosses of all stripes play the game. Israel is special. I’d like to see the day when someone with the power of Pelosi is asked point blank to her face if she supports a two-state agreement (she personally, not because of official policy) and how she can justify supporting Israel come hell or high water as it keeps stealing land and water. She might even be at a loss for words. After all, she couldn’t have given Netenyahu a more slimy, sycophantic reception. Is it only the money and fear of being verbally and politically attacked that keeps Congress in thrall to and enthralled with Israeli interests in the US? The paradigm is: if you support Palestinian rights, you’re anti-Israel (= anti-Semitic), but has anyone heard that the Israel lobby is ANTI-Palestinian or ANTI-Arab.
Look at what happens to politicians that speak against Israel. They don’t last too long.
Abstain as oppose to Veto. Or Abstain as opposed to voting Yes.
Voting Yes on a resolution condemning Israel would be a major signal, but could produce domestic opposition in the US.
Obviously the former. I think both send signals, but obviously the latter is much stronger. UN Resolutions rarely ever do anything, if they ever have, but it would still be a pretty symbolic change. Has the US ever not vetoed a condemnation of Israel?
Actually, resolutions have never had any effect at all where Israel is concerned, but they have been used to justify action against other countries, of which Iraq is a case in point.
The internet has changed all the rules. Zionists can no long stop people from discussing what the “true cost” of this ideology has been on all of us. ADL was quick to become youtube’s offical censor. But as they put their fingers in the dike, the water pours over the top.
The internet has leveled the paying field. As the zionists continue to rewrite history, it is quickly debunked…..well, at least on some websites that have not been completely taken over. It’s so obvious when it happens.
As much as I am still pissed at Markos for banning some of us, I am greatful he refused to shut down the topic.
That wasn’t a case of the resolution doing anything, it was the US acting above the law and ignoring the results.
“Of 10 demands posed by Obama, four deal with Jerusalem,” but what we are not seeing in them is the demand for East Jerusalem to become the capital of Palestine. And while I am unable to find the link, I do believe that Obama repeated the words that Jerusalem would be the united capital of Israel, possibly before his election.
East Jerusalem has been the sticking point in all past negotiations, even the phoney one that Olmert offered verbally to Abbas, the 94% solution sans East Jerusalem, two months before the Israeli election and just several days before the Gaza invasion. Of course it did not go any further.
He said it at an address to AIPAC shortly after becoming the nominee. Hillary also spoke at that same conference. His remarks were treated as a gaffe for the then-Senator from Illinois.
And Obama is a quick study. I don’t think he will be making that mistake again.
I agree with Booman, and articles he quotes. Times are changing. The neo-cons that took us to war no longer have cover. The Bush Administration has been discredited. And the Generals are finally standing their ground. Yes, Petraeus was forced to back peddle a bit, but that will only further infuriate the military leadership. The most powerful lobby in Washington is not AIPAC or NRA, or AMA…it’s the US Military. Wish I could find the article that made that point, but I did not bookmark it.
There are several good articles at Asia Times, even one that makes the arguement that Obama will be forced to back down.
The military knows exactly what the strategic cost will be if we back down now. Blair was called a pootle, what will the generals be called.
The internet has defanged the censors. That is why it was so imporant to shut down I/P at daily kos. It did not work.
I forgot the link:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/03/dennis-ross-bats-for-netanyahu.html
This article is pretty good too:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/0310/Fierce_debate_on_Israel_underway_inside_Obama_administ
ration.html?showall#
“The neo-cons that took us to war no longer have cover. The Bush Administration has been discredited.“
I would be much more impressed with all this if people did not keeping speaking as if the whole thing were the fault of the neocons, the Bush administration, and Netanyahu, and as if this were all something new and different from the past 62 years. I know that you know better than this, but it is as if there is no memory of the fact that Israel’s bestest buddies and supporters over the decades have been Democrats, liberals, and so-called “progressives”, not Republicans and conservatives. That is the case not only in Washington, but in the media, in the blogosphere, and everywhere else with the possible exception of academia where there seems to be a little bit better balance (which Daniel Pipes and his ilk are trying desperately to upset).
As for Obama being a quick study, etc., what is really disturbing is that he, of all people, needed to learn that lesson. He apparently thought it was quite acceptable to promise Israel all of Jerusalem – something that even George Bush knew better than to do. I know it was about winning the election at that point, but he made a right fool of himself with that, and with other outlandish promises he made in that grovel-fest.
You can say the neocons no longer have cover, and George Bush has been discredited, but what about Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton – and Barack Obama, and all the other Democrats who have spoken and acted on Israel’s behalf and to the detriment of Israel’s victims, and of peace? Why on earth should we trust them?
Having said that, I did see a definite change during the Gaza massacre. One of the first things I noticed to my shock was that the network news reports were finally doing some reporting that appeared almost balanced. They actually showed footage of dead and wounded Palestinian children, some of whom were blonde and blue eyed. And I noticed some change in attitude on the part of American people. For the first time they had been allowed to see a reality that many of us have been aware of for decades. So, based on that alone I would say that times are changing. Whether they are changing fast enough or strongly enough remains to be seen.
I can’t argue with a word you said.
I am fully aware of the cover that Clinton gave the settlement movement, intentional or not. I am also aware that when Clinton was ready to call in the chips, Monica, Tripp and the Goldsberg’s struck. No don’t about timing for me. And then Hillary is handed the New York senate seat. Too convenient. Who was THAT foreign agency listening in on the White House?
I also remember when Hillary spoke up in defense of a Palestinian State, she was quickly silenced.
Look at every democrat that has tried to speak. Percy, Paul Findley, McKinney, many others. I think congress is just intimidated. A bitter pill they are forced to swallow.
If I can name one author that changed my view of Zionist Israel, it’s Victor Ostrovsky. Books like the By Way of Deception, the Making of a Mossad Officer. He lays out exactly how the Zionists infiltrate and intimidate.
Paul Findley’s books are great, too. The history is there. We have not started with the book burning, YET.
I know, you know most of this already, just somethimes it needs repeating.
People also forget just how many Jews argued against Zionism….and lost.
Call me cynical, but I don’t think Hillary or any of the rest of the mainstream Democrats gives two figs about Palestine or the Palestinians any more than they ever gave two figs about the Iraqi people. They care about their almighty careers and the personal power and prestige it brings them. And I am not at all convinced that Obama is any different.
What put me off Hillary Clinton permanently was one incident during her Senatorial campaign in which she delivered a very public slap in the face to her Muslim supporters. It seems that certain Zionist groups expressed their unhappiness that she had accepted campaign contributions from Muslims, so she not only returned the “objectionable” contributions, she made a P.R. event out of it so that it was all over the media that she was returning Muslim contributions. That told me everything I needed to know about her.
It’s not Obama that’s different (per se), it’s the times. When our security is threatened, when the military brass tacks are arguing that this relationship is coming with heavy costs, things can change.
For example, do you remember the time when America threatened to cut off Israel’s aid? It was back in 2000 relating to China. Israel was going to sell a radar system to China, and the US didn’t want that because then China could use the technology to track American jets.
After this threat was made, Israel cut the deal with China off.
This could happen again if the military lobby’s voice gets loud enough.
George H.W. Bush also threatened to cut off aid to Israel. He lost his bid for a second term.
Mostly because of Ross Perot. It wasn’t like he was primaried.
No, but he certainly hurt himself badly with Jewish voters and others for whom Israel was primary. Pandering to Israel is virtually a requirement for a successful political career in the United States.
PS Of course, the reason the military is so in an uproar over Israel as a security threat right now really has little if anything to do with any possible threat to the U.S. per se. It is really about the threat to the troops and civilians that are in foreign countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. enforcing the various projects of empire. If the military weren’t all over the world trying to dominate foreign countries they wouldn’t have very much to worry about.
Oh and:
Ross does not mention that he helped write Obama’s speech. But he concedes that he omitted from the speech the fact that the final status of Jerusalem would be resolved by negotiations. I also note a remarkable use of words: “It’s also a fact that the city should not be divided again. That’s also a fact.” How can a “should” be a “fact”? If this is something to be decided by future negotiations, how can it be a fact? And why is someone framing an argument as something that simply cannot be questioned?
Obama made the promise that Jerusalem would be the undivided capital of Jerusalem during his first AIPAC grovel after he had secured the nomination. To the best of my knowledge no other President or presidential candidate has ever made such a promise.
Thanx for a good thread Booman. I woud make two points that Friedman misses.
So, for my own reasons, I hope Bibi digs in his heals. I hope he finds plenty of right wing supporters at home to keep him in power. I hope AIPAC and their allies of rapture ready wing-nuts keep Obama in check.
I would add that America’s best interest do not lay in imposing a settlement. It is in withdrawing ALL support from ALL nations and adopting a policy of strict neutrality.
No substantive comment, as this particular issue is beyond my ken. But just wanted to say that I remain impressed with the breadth of discussion, analysis and knowledge across the board here, on so many topics. Fascinating comments, all.
But as long as we need oil, we won’t withdraw. America will be forced into a premature identity crisis if our corporations are forced to back down.
We compete with China for all those oil contracts. Days after Saddum signed contracts with China, we started bombing.
Now China has signed with Iran.
Haven’t read this yet, but Bhadrakumar is must reading, world affairs have become the babyboomers national pastime.
China wary of US-Russia nuclear embrace
By M K Bhadrakumar
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LC27Ad02.html
“the Israeli-Palestinian peace process — for Israel — has gone from being a necessity to a hobby.“
The peace process has been a necessity, but not bringing it to what most of us would consider a successful conclusion. That Israel has done everything in its power to avoid. The peace process has not exactly been a hobby, it has been a device by which Israel has deceived much of the world into believing Israel was working for peace, when in fact it was working, at times frantically, to create facts on the ground designed to obviate a Palestinian state.
Which is of course, THAT which should not be named:
And as soon as Hamas started making overtures for peace, and nearly stopped the missiles, Israel attacked.
Actually, according to the Israeli government, Hamas did not fire any rockets at all during the ceasefire, and did a creditable job of restraining other groups that were not parties to the ceasefire (and therefore not bound by it), and were not under Hamas’ control at all. And all this despite multiple violations by Israel within the first couple of weeks, and despite the fact that Israel did not honour its obligations under the ceasefire to ease the blockade. Rocket fire from Gaza decreased 99% from the start of the ceasefire until Israel broke it by invading deep into Gaza on some pretext, and killing a bunch of Palestinians.
And this is a typical pattern by the way that many of us have noticed over the decades, and that was recently studied and quantified. Hamas has declared and kept quite a number of formal and informal, bilateral and unilateral ceasefires, and in the overwhelming majority of the cases it is Israel that violates the ceasefire, ultimately breaking it. A common pattern has Israel embarking on an escalating series of provocations to which Hamas does not react until finally either another group reacts giving Israel and excuse for an all-out assault, or else Israel will finally commit a violation so egregious that Hamas is all but forced to act in self-defense or retaliate. Of course, it is inevitably reported as Hamas attacking and Israel retaliating, but if one examines the sequence of events and the timeline, it is clear that the opposite has been the case.
You are completely right. Israel broke the ceasefire when they bombed the tunnels and killed several Palestinians. I have clearly seen the pattern.
This time around, the Zionists continue to dig around the temple mount, continue expanding the “women’s” section of the Western Wall, continue rebuilding a synagogue in the middle of the arab section. In addition, they continue shooting at fishermen and continue random shots into Gaza.
State Terrorism.
I think there needs to be some teeth in the threat. Some quiet discussion about $ removed from the subsidy for every housing unit built outside internationally recognized boundries. The money is then redirected to domestic needs, in a district of an uncritical supporter of Israel. When the President presents the check, he can say its from reducing foreign aid. If the Congressman wants to cancel the school just to pay for housing in East Jerusalem, then he can explain that to his constituents.
R
I read on haartz that the loans guarantees we give Israel are worth BILLIONS in low interest loans.
And I still can’t figure out how Israel’s economy was almost untouched. Why didn’t Wall Street sell them all those great AAA securities, if we are such close friends??
.
(aipac.org) – In less than three days, three-quarters of the House of Representatives signed a bipartisan letter to the Obama administration underscoring the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship. Spearheaded by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), and addressed to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the letter lays out the bedrock support that exists in Congress for the U.S.-Israel alliance. “The United States and Israel are close allies whose people share a deep and abiding friendship based on a shared commitment to core values including democracy, human rights and freedom of the press and religion.”
Haaretz: Nearly 300 Congress members declare commitment to ‘unbreakable’ U.S.-Israel bond
“The plummeting support for Obama, the Republican victory in the recent Senate race in Massachusetts and the Democrats’ anticipated losses in next fall’s congressional elections worked on Netanyahu like Viagra. He notes frequently to aides, politicians and journalists that Israelis don’t understand America like he does. That they see only the president and the administration, and don’t understand the power of Congress, the lobbying groups and the think tanks.”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."“core values including democracy, human rights and freedom of the press and religion.“
What an absolute crock! Israel, for one, is not a democracy in any real sense unless you define democracy purely based on the fact that they have elections. As for human rights and freedom of the press, one only has to read the annual U.S. State Department Human Rights Report on Israel to see how hilarious that is, and we all know the United States’ human rights record in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, South American, and around the world. And freedom of the press? Yeah, right. Do I need to go into detail on this about bombing headquarters of Al Jazeera and Al Arabia, among others, detaining and sometimes torturing journalists for months or years, barring journalists from Falluja, Nablus, Gaza, and anywhere else they might see evidence of war crimes? And there there is the unusual number of journalists killed by American and Israeli forces.
These guys have no shame at all.
Can we put this under the category of a “sternly worded letter”.
Congress is not determinative of US relations with Israel, and the Secretary of State has to re-emphasize our relationship with Israel in order to get a hearing with the Israeli government, which is quite willing to go it alone as long as they get external support. The US government has any leverage at all because it is the largest provider of that external support. The changed paradigm is that the US is beginning to use that leverage, because it is in US national interest to (1) become energy independent as fast as possible and (2) extricate ourselves from Middle East politics as fast as possible without leaving chaos that could draw us back in.
The change in paradigm is that where previously the Middle East was a strategic outpost in containing the Soviet Union, now it’s a major vulnerability to US interests that is generating cost but few benefits.
But here’s the thing, the Israeli’s themselves seem to be quite supportive of the greater of two evils Lieberman. Can there even be a centrist government in Israel right now? There are so many hardliners.
When people elect their government, they get the government they deserve.
But look, how many times do I have to say it? It makes no difference whether Israel has a centrist or a leftist government. They all do the same things. Get hold of a timeline on illegal colonization activities, acts of aggression, and human rights abuses by government, and you will see the picture very clearly. As I have said numerous times before, back in the day we used to say Likud talks about building settlements, and Labour builds them. And as an example, the sainted Yitzhak Rabin had one of the more horrific human rights records. Among other things, he is the one who ordered the IOF to break the bones of children who threw stones.
As Uri Avnery tell us today at antiwar.com, there are Labor people who build/built in Jerusalem and elsewhere and kept their mouths shut, and then there are/were big mouths like Netenyahu who can’t wait to go around bragging about extending the colonies, taking credit for humiliating Palestinians. That’s right. The policy in the US has always disadvantaged the Palestinians. Wasn’t the US the first country to recognize Israel? Will it also be the first to recognize Palestine when it’s independence is declared? No. As an aside, why do so many people in the US refer to the country as ‘The State of Israel’? Is that any different from simply ‘Israel’? This is definitely something the AIPAC must have pushed but I can’t guess what the motive might be.
Expecting a change in US-Israel policy is really whistling in the dark. The latter country clearly understands that the drug of choice of the US Congress is money, especially money to win reelection. So what does AIPAC do to maintain its influence? That’s easy, provide the necessary dollars so American Congressmen and Congresswomen can win their elections. Oh yes, arranging a primary challenge for a particularly stubborn Congressperson (ala Cynthia McKinney) is a wonderful audio-visual aide for the rest of the US House and Senate. Vote against Israeli interests and expect your political doom.
Israel clearly understands the breath and depth of the corruption affecting the US Congress. Until that corruption ends, the influence of Israel will remain paramount even though it is the client state in its relationship with these United States.
The assumption here is that Israeli policies will never get too toxic either for AIPAC or for American public opinion.
And that Congress has unitary control over American foreign policy.
Israel is neither omniscient nor omnipotent. They understand the corruption of the US Congress to the very extent we do.
And that there are not now alternative sources of campaign financing, thanks to the Citizens United decision.
As for Obama, he sent a little signal of his displeasure by sidetracking bunker buster bombs destined for Israel into an arms depot on Diego Garcia. There could be more.
No Israeli government or Israeli action will ever be too toxic for AIPAC, believe me! AIPAC is as extreme as the most extreme government Israel could ever have.
Then AIPAC will be marginalized in American politics at the point at which the Israeli government becomes politically toxic.
I should have cited the corruption of the US executive branch of government as well as the legislative branch. The Chief Executive, in particular, is in need of funds to win elections. Look at Obama’s quick trip to the AIPAC meeting in 2008 once he had secured the democratic nomination. It’s so easy to control American political institutions if you have the money and the will to use it. I wonder why it has taken the Arab nations so long to learn this lesson. Perhaps, they should consult with the pharmaceuticals, the financials, the insurance people or, of course, the guys in the military defense complex.
I should have cited the corruption of the US executive branch of government as well as the legislative branch. The Chief Executive, in particular, is in need of funds to win elections. Look at Obama’s quick trip to the AIPAC meeting in 2008 once he had secured the democratic nomination. It’s so easy to control American political institutions if you have the money and the will to use it. I wonder why it has taken the Arab nations so long to learn this lesson. Perhaps, they should consult with the pharmaceuticals, the financials, the insurance people or, of course, the guys in the military defense complex.
Thanks for frontpaging this story. As you can see, not everyone is as optimistic about a real solution to the IP conflict as recent events might suggest. No doubt that there is a change in US-Israeli relations, but if past behavior is any indication of the future, pessimism is also in play. Let’s see what happens when settlement expansion is renewed in several months.
If anyone can speak about positive movement, it would seem to be coming from Europe and calls for the recognition of Palestine as an independent country, even before borders are set, because, given the Israeli government’s right wing focus on the Greater Israel concept, Israel will never agree to borders that provide for a sovereign Palestine abut the Jordan River and with East Jerusalem incorporated.