SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Obama’s Middle East Is in Tatters, Utter Tatters

TEL AVIV JOURNAL SEPTEMBER 20, 2011

Obama’s Middle East Is in Tatters, Utter Tatters

BY MARTIN PERETZ

It is not actually his region. Still, with the arrogance that is so characteristic of his behavior in matters he knows little about (which is a lot of matters), he entered the region as if in a triumphal march. But it wasn’t the power and sway of America that he was representing in Turkey and in Egypt. For the fact is that he has not much respect for these representations of the United States. In the mind of President Obama, in fact, these are what have wreaked havoc with our country’s standing in the world. So what—or, rather, who—does he exemplify in his contacts with foreign countries and their leaders? His exultancy gives the answer away. It is he himself, lui-mème. Alas, he is a president disconnected from his nation, without enthusiasts for his style, without loyalists to his policies, without a true friend unless that’s what you can call his top aide de camp,Valerie Jarrett, which probably you can. Obama is lucky, but it’s the only luck he has, that there are nutsy Republican enemies who aspire to his job. Maybe Rick Perry can save him from … well, yes, himself. I wouldn’t take bets on that, though.

Obama’s first personal excursions into the Middle East as president were to Turkey and Egypt. Recep Tayyip Erdogan welcomed his visit. Indeed, the president’s journey set the framework for the Ottomanization of modern Turkey’s foreign policy. The 1923 Treaty of Lausanne formally abrogated the empire’s previous rights in North Africa, these being the rights it had lost in the First World War. From then on, the country was content to make trouble only for the Kurds across its borders and for Greece. A member of NATO, with more than 600,000 troops under arms (omitting more than half a million reservists and paramilitary), it certainly played a role in deflecting Soviet ambitions in the Mediterranean. Now, with the Russian threat (temporarily?) deferred, the military still faces minor annoyance from Georgia, Armenia, Iraq. But since Obama communed with Erdogan—by all accounts, it was love at first sight—the prime minister has been taking on new projects. Only in the last days has he made what can reasonably be called a conqueror’s march through Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, evoking the old empire’s rule in North Africa not so long ago.

After all, let’s face it: Egypt is simply spent. Erdogan can seduce it with a speech or two. Yet it does have up-to-date military equipment. But, if it were tempted by war with Israel, Jerusalem would not give it the respectful pity that it gave Cairo’s Third Army 38 years ago. The Egyptian military has lost control of the Sinai to the Bedouins, even though Israel has already permitted thousands of Egyptian regulars, contravening specific prohibitions of the bilateral 1979 peace treaty, to re-enter the peninsula with heavy military equipment. For far into the future, I would assume. So what about the construction of Egypt in political, judicial, and economic terms? I’d give you heavy odds that in a decade or even two the political system will still be as undemocratic and corrupt as it has been since the comic and corpulent King Farouk reigned. By the way, it was the CIA’s Middle East head spook who initiated the coup that dispatched the monarch and his family to Italy and then to Monaco where he joined other deposed royals in the sedentary life. After Farouk came the reign of the colonels, a model favored by Allen Dulles whose wisdom spooked the region ever since. The courts will be fair when hell freezes over which, given global warning, is not at all likely. And the economy? My, my: With the desertification of the land, the high birth rate, and the functional illiteracy of most of the population, do not believe that anything will change quickly or, for that matter, anything much will change at all.

Were it not for Libyan oil, no country would have been tempted to intervene on “the shores of Tripoli” again. Even with its oil and with NATO intervention, the outcome of the civil war will not be as clear as folks like me had hoped or as decisive as the huge claque of always optimistic Arabisants have already concluded. Tout va bien. (Speaking of other Arabisants—without Arabic, incidentally—I wonder what my sort-of Harvard colleagues Stephen Walt and Joseph Nye now have to say about their notable protege Saif al-Qaddafi. Indeed, Walt has written against targeted killing by the alliance in Libya, doubtless making a pitch to save Saif’s ass. Yet the Kennedy School professor doesn’t seem nearly as interested in the random killings of Jews by Palestinians and other Arabs.) Under Qaddafi, Libya set its sights southward, trying to become a major force in sub-Saharan Africa. African leaders took the country’s petrodollars and gave Qaddafi the preposterous titles he required for his self-respect. He did become a comrade of Robert Mugabe and other gangster politicians, and even Nelson Mandela, yes, the sainted Nelson Mandela, has stood by him through thick and thin. But this augurs nothing special for the future of Libya. On the other hand, Erdogan’s stage show in Tripoli does put Turkey at the top of the list to dominate the crazy tyrant’s family business in oil.

Frankly, Tunisia doesn’t matter much in high politics. History was mostly made on its people rather than by them. When, for example, Israel drove the leadership of Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization out of Lebanon, the Arab League forced the organization onto Habib Bourguiba’s calm country from which it continued its elevated work. Bourguiba tried nonetheless to pacify the Israeli conflict with the Palestinians, to no avail, of course. Jews settled in this region long ago, after the destruction of the First Temple. So Tunisia was the home of one of Jewry’s earliest and most significant settlements outside its promised land. What with the “return,” however, and the emergence of Palestinian terror, there are fewer than 1,800 Jews in the country, a rough thousand in the legendary island of Djerba and the rest in Tunis. The Berber presence has played a role in both the Libyan and Tunisian revolt. But since journalists have barely heard of the Berbers they will not get their due in the media. This will soon change. Of course, Erdogan has now more or less placed the Turkish flag on this turf and he will extract whatever he can from the country. Good news: Small though it is, Tunisia is the most advanced country in the Maghreb, not a huge or intimidating comparative pool. Still.

All of this is in no way real big potatoes for Erdogan. But he surely required a build-up by someone at the top to pull off even this relatively modest adventure. That top guy was Barack Obama. And I suspect that the president is not surprised by the malevolently cranky despot’s success in l’Afrique du nord. The real query is whether Obama is at all startled by Erdogan’s seriously consequential mischief against Israel. I am not reporting. But I can well imagine the president of the U.S. and the prime minister of Turkey having a good chat about the troubles the Netanyahu government brings to the area where Islam is the dominant mode of thought, the dominant way of life, and the dominant religion. If such a conversation took place it was surely at Obama’s initiative. He was the one whose conscience burned for the question of Palestine.

As it happens, Erdogan had never shown much empathy for the trials of his Palestinian fellow-faithful. The contrary is true. The posture of his country for decades was that it and Israel would through their dominance on the military scene pacify the neighborhood. Israel considered Turkey a buffer against Muslim millenarianism. To Turkey, Israel was a vital trade partner, a technocratic mentor, an ace in the hole against Islamic fanaticism which surged all around it, most significantly in Iraq and Iran. But Erdogan had raised the passions of Turkey’s own ummah in his movement’s political conflict with both of his enemies, civil society and the military. Trying to use religious extremism also made him captive of its fanatics.

The instrument of this mobilization was mounting a campaign against the Jewish state. There were gradual lead-ups to the confrontation between the Israeli military and a noxious combo of the Free Gaza Movement (a Hamas affiliate) and the International Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief. But the IHH, shorthand for this flatulently named and militantly hostile agit-prop group, had no other object than to get the IDF to fire on its flotilla. As it happens, even an independent UN investigation found this spring that Israel’s intercession was entirely legal, if a bit too eager. Still, Erdogan has clutched on to the cause and he won’t let it go. He gave a hardline speech to the Arab League in support of the Palestinian campaign to get the UN to recognize and give credentials to the phantom state. Ankara is now fully enlisted in the PA’s effort to substitute an insubstantial resolution sanctioning a “state” for a real transaction setting one up with the intricate and, indeed, cumbersome provisions that alone might end a century-old war.

Now, even the Obama administration is hostile to this effort. Some of the team, especially Dennis Ross and our ambassador in Israel, Daniel Shapiro, have followed this saga for decades. It realizes that this is not the first time that the Palestinians have declared statehood. In fact, 124 of the 193 governments represented at the United Nations already have recognized the State of Palestine. Presumably, the Palestinian Authority has dispatched ambassadors to some of these countries, although I don’t know with what activities they fill their time. No doubt, also, a good number of these recognizing states send their ambassadors to wherever the State of Palestine really is. Which actually is nowhere. Or maybe Ramallah where it would be quite an adventure for a young diplomat to serve. Jeffrey Goldberg has just published a piece in Bloomberg Businessweek arguing that “Palestine May Win a Vote, But Won’t Be a State.” That’s the way I see it too.

I wish there would be a Palestinian state, not because there is actually a real Palestinian people. I’m not persuaded of that. And, of course, I don’t think that there is a Nigerian people which is why, when younger, I was an active supporter of Biafra, the would-be Ibo state, squashed by an indifferent world in behalf of the territorial integrity of, yes, Nigeria which is breaking apart before our eyes, in part because of the machinations of Muslim extremism. The world will some day have to come to grips with the fact that most governments are not really representative of their peoples. The whole notion of a country’s UN membership being a certificate of legitimacy is morally corrupt. UN membership is an admission ticket to the expensive blandishments of New York.

So I want a Palestine because I want Israelis not to have to burden themselves with an internal population that has neither the coherence of a nation nor a tradition of democratic norms. President Obama is enamored of the current Palestinian narrative, as false as it is self-pitying. This is a simple narrative and an over-simple projection into the future. It assumes that a 1949 map of the cease-fire lines—yes, of course, with appropriate but tiny land exchanges—will assure the peace. I do not think it assures anything except that Israel would be deflected from the art and science of building an ever freer society, a chore—if you’ll forgive me—it has shown some talents in doing. I do not know Obama’s head. Maybe nobody does. But his fervent and fervid clamoring for a simple Israeli route to an independent Palestine misled no people so much as the Palestinians. When he retreated from his formulae, which the PA assumed he could impose on Israel, they were already on an independence high. His somber entreaties could not bring them back to any semblance of reality.

This conundrum of a non-negotiated state for the Palestinians appeals to the ardent déclarateurs. It ignores the fact that free and responsible politics has never been a habit in the Arab world. Read me right: never. There is nothing in Palestinian history to have made the Arabs of Palestine an exception to this stubborn commonplace now being played out again in virtually every country in the region. A commitment is never a commitment. A border is never a border. A peace is never long-lasting. Turkey has now added its serious mischief to the scenario. Erdogan himself will now unravel Cairo’s peace with Jerusalem, as Erdogan has already locked the PA into phantom international politics.

Poor Barack Obama. His adoring view of Erdogan has stimulated the Turkish regime to be a force not for stability in Cairo or reason in Ramallah. What’s more, Obama’s Palestinian initiatives have all collapsed. But the most striking collapse of his Arab politics has been in Syria where he posited that there were sensible and dependable men with whom Israel could make peace. Of course, that would entail giving up the Golan Heights (which are not the Great Plains) to Dr. Assad. The administration courted the family tyranny and its epigones. Responsible, reasonable, reserved. Two smart-assed Jewish boys were dispatched to play computer games with the Damascus elite. They were also enthused by the possibilities. I know that none of these people pulled the triggers on any of the thousands who are now dead. They just encouraged the clan to think they will get away with murder forever.

The fact that Obama so thoroughly misunderstands the Middle East, so thoroughly also misunderstands militant Islam, has blotted out for both the Arabs and the Israelis the bona fides of the official American intermediaries. It is not simply that some of them are biased, a bit to Israel, a much larger cohort to the victim mentality of the Palestinians and to the oil deposits of other Arabs. It is that this administration has been stupid about the whole region and entranced with the Palestinian narrative which is, to be utterly brash but candid, nearly wholly false.

Martin Peretz is editor-in-chief emeritus of The New Republic.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 149 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

149 comments

Marty's relevancy is in tatters, utter tatters.

- RJSampson1

September 20, 2011 at 12:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Taters! Udder taters. Yet another keeper from the petty, addled editor emeritus, the shame of TNR, the shame of Harvard. What a great reminder as to why I won't be renewing my subscription.

- alphprol

September 20, 2011 at 12:10am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tatters is good. I like mine fried, but boiled & mashed is purty good too.

- Haole45

September 20, 2011 at 12:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama is so naive. Doesn't he know that American interests don't matter? All that matters is the narrow interests of right-wing Israeli political parties. They get a veto over all US foreign policy.

- Virginia Centrist

September 20, 2011 at 1:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Can I just say, just sum up in one sentence, what it is that Obama has done in the Middle East? He has gotten out of the way of history. Not unlike how George H.W. Bush got out of the way of history in Eastern Europe from 1989-1991, Obama has stopped the futile efforts of the US to try to thwart history, to impose a solution, to stop the unstoppable tide. Mubarak tried to stop it and failed. Gaddafi, too. Now Assad and Netanyahu are both trying. How well will they succeed? Khamenei too stands before the tide - though while I suspect the glued-together, fouled nest of his regime will hold together for a little longer, it will not survive his death. How much, in Marty's fantasies, could a President McCain, a President Palin or Perry, do to change things? While they remain fantasies, everything. But in reality?

- jcovell

September 20, 2011 at 1:13am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's been a long time since I took the time to read something by Peretz. Now I recall why I stayed away so long. This is poorly written, intellectually vacuous gibberish.

- Thunderroad

September 20, 2011 at 1:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So far as I can tell Marty is above all concerned to prevent the Palestinians from carrying out their declared goal of following in the footsteps of their hero Adolf Hitler and bringing about a second Holocaust. Why is Marty's goal so reprehensible? The fact is that the American and European left hate Israel because it is a free democratic country allied with the United States. The left, even the so-called democratic left, is at war with truth, honesty and human decency. What a sad and bitter irony that so many Jews hope to escape the hatred of the world by false confessions and professions of self-hatred. God bless Marty for refusing to play that game.

- bulbman1066

September 20, 2011 at 1:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

An alternative title for Marty's piece: The Middle East Is in Tatters, But While the Seams Come Apart It's Fun To Accuse Obama of Being Responsible -- Whoo-Hoo! That Feels Good!

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 2:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, the Middle East may be in tatters but one is hard-pressed to find how Obama is responsible for this. Marty I agreed with your last column, about the fact that Israeli victims of terror must be recognized! But this? Oy. Look. Obama cannot do anything one way or another if Erdogan and other Middle Easterners want to become Islamists any more than he can help the fact that many Americans seem determined to return to the Middle Ages. The one interesting tidbit in this piece is the assertion that Gaddafi fils is a protege of Walt? OMG. That deserves more elaboration.

- Sophia

September 20, 2011 at 3:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Very good piece as always by Martin Peretz. Excellent historical narrative. I may add that Barack Hussein Obama, yes he is proud of his Moslem heritage, behaves like a typical Moslem. Barack Hussein Obama indulges in repetitive speeches, tells people he is their friend, turns around and back knives them . This is typical of Moslems. It is in their nature. Insults Nethanyauh, the prime minister of Israel, at every opportunity. He shows how brave he is , while bending to the Saudi king. Barack Hussein Obama is a pal of Erdogan. Barack Hussein Obama is a pal of Bassar al Assad, the Syrian dictator, giraffe look alike, happily killing his own unarmed people for the uncivil demonstrations against his dictatorship. Barack Hussein Obama did not call the Egyptians after the invasion of the Israeli embassy. He talked with the Israelis only after the Israelis called him, and so goes on and on. Have you heard anything from Barack Hussein Obama telling Erdogan to shut his mouth and stop bashing Israel? I have not, have you? Barack Hussein Obama is a do nothing president. He thinks that speeches are replacement for action. Well America has 25 million people out of work. America has 10 million homes under foreclosure. The largest surprise is that Barack Hussein Obama is running for re-election. This dum dum thinks with his feet not with his brain if he has any. Well Barack Hussein Obama is of Moslem descent, so what do you expect?

- JAIMECHUCH

September 20, 2011 at 3:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Moslem trades. Coward,check, many speeches do nothing, check, high corruption, check. Welcome to Moslem style presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. Kick out Barack Hussein Obama in 2012. Send him as ambassador to Syria. Or Ramalah. Good riddance of rotten nuts.

- JAIMECHUCH

September 20, 2011 at 3:38am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This essay begins with a critique of Mr. Obama's visits to Turkey and Egypt in 2009, on a stylistic rather than substantive basis - growing the tiresome tradition of searching for apologist rhetoric where it does not exist. It then proceeds to describe the historically rooted problems of a number of Middle Eastern nations, the growing regional influence of Turkey under the AKP Party, and of course Mr. Peretz's own jejune views on the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. The essay ignores a litany of Mr. Obama's accomplishments, and summarily dismisses the few it does acknowledge. There are valid and urgent arguments made throughout. Mr. Peretz's unwavering cynicism does provide a necessary perspective. But the essay's title "Obama's Middle East Is In Tatters, Utter Tatters" is both misleading and counterfactual.

- tahirjon

September 20, 2011 at 5:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The essay ignores a litany of Mr. Obama's accomplishments," ??

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 6:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Did someone hack into the site and switch IP addresses with The National Review?

- pdougherty

September 20, 2011 at 7:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Except for targeting Obama, the essay isn't too bad. He is going after Obama in a reflexive and non substantive way. I prefer the praise given Obama for handling the recent Egyptian riot at the Israeli Embassy in Cairo: Here is an account about Obama's handling of the situation which should cheer his supporters: "Efraim Halevy: Obama Showed "Leadership Of Historic Dimensions" To Save Israelis In Cairo Embassy" http://www.israelpolicyforum.org/blog/efraim-halevy-obama-showed-leaders...

- arnon

September 20, 2011 at 7:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

While there is much to criticize about Obama's quixotic Middle East policy, Marty Peretz and others need to offer alternative solutions. I would like to begin with the suggestion that the Democrats nominate someone different for President in 2012, someone not sentimental about his Islamic heritage nor influenced by the outsized influence of Islam on Chicago Black politics. We shouldn't just roll the dice and rely on Republican lunacy to win the White House. We should make Kurdish independence a priority of US Middle East policy. That would take a bite out of Islamic militancy, Iran, Turkey, and Syria, and redress a major historical injustice. The Kurds (today at least 25 million people) were promised statehood by the League of Nations after WW One and never got it. We should end Gen. Patraeus's projects to reinvent tribal Islamic societies. There is nothing sacred about the artificial states of Iraq and Afghanistan that attempted to cohabitate warring tribes and sects. And we need to restructure America to conserve less energy. We have reached peak oil in the sense that it will only get more costly to extract and deliver. Every alternative source of energy has its costs.

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 8:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Could we maybe raise my (and everyone else's) subscription rate a bit and hire an editor for Marty? Here's a nice bit: "This will soon change. Of course, Erdogan has now more or less placed the Turkish flag on this turf and he will extract whatever he can from the country. Good news: Small though it is, Tunisia is the most advanced country in the Maghreb, not a huge or intimidating comparative pool. Still. All of this is in no way real big potatoes for Erdogan." Wait, it gets better! The next two sentences: "But he surely required a build-up by someone at the top to pull off even this relatively modest adventure. That top guy was Barack Obama. And I suspect that the president is not surprised by the malevolently cranky despot’s success in l’Afrique du nord." Wow. Who could've seen 1950s private-eye diction (". . . someone at the top to pull off even this relatively modest adventure. The top guy was Barack Obama.") into French affectation coming? Pace Marty: writing this bad "is in some way real big potatoes" for The New Republic. Seriously, get your "editor-in-chief emeritus" an editor. Failing that, maybe there's a kid doing AP English at a local high-school or a Remedial English teacher at a nearby community college who'd be willing to work with him.

- mtinora@me.com

September 20, 2011 at 8:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Change to "to conserve energy" in last paragraph of my previous post!

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 8:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I appreciate MP's singular concern for Israel, especially with regard to the Palestinians, for Israel is more than an ally and friend; upon Israel, we hang our hope for humanity. But MP's criticism of Obama and the US goes too far, criticism that is a substitute for an honest assessment of the performance of those close to MP and who he exempts from criticism. I second the comment by jcovell: it's history that is occurring in the middle east and, notwithstanding those who believe that only the US has the right to make history, the US no longer has the authority or the funds to prevent it. That's right, prevent it, for the US cannot control history, it can only prevent it, something it has done with dwindling success not only in the middle east but most every region in the world. Yes, this a time of high anxiety in the middle east. But for the first time in my lifetime, the first time ever really, the people of the middle east are making their own history. For some, like MP, who believe hatred of Jews is the core motivation for middle easterners, history is a fearful thing. I choose to be more optimistic, if only because it's not within our control to prevent history.

- rayward

September 20, 2011 at 8:11am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can't decide what's more nauseating, seeing yet another installment of marty's mental dysentery, or the fact that TNR continues to let bigoted jaimechuch continue to post his racist commentary. We all seem to be in agreement when it comes to idiots posting anti-semetic bile and how they should not be allowed the priviledge to share their thoughts hatred for Jews is what they choose to communicate; I suggest we come together on denouncing hatred for Muslims as well... hatred for any group, for that matter. I'm all for free speech, but all jaime has to offer is hate. Last time I checked the world was fully stocked up on hate. Enough.

- Tristan

September 20, 2011 at 8:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tristan, It's not clear anyone at TNR actually reads readers' comments. Timothy Noah responded to a couple, but, eh, he was brand new to the job. It's also pretty clear that online pieces are commissioned (or submitted in the case of Peretz) and then just thrown on-line with little if any editing. No one cares.

- mtinora@me.com

September 20, 2011 at 9:00am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I wonder if Jonathan Chait would've posted the following if he was still at TNR: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/09/why_bibi_hates_obama.html May be on reason he left. The general slackening of quality here may be another.

- mtinora@me.com

September 20, 2011 at 9:14am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Martin Peretz's fascist zionist world is in tatters, utter tatters. LOL

- MSA70

September 20, 2011 at 9:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

MSA70 and Jaimechuch should get together, they'd make a fine couple.

- Tristan

September 20, 2011 at 9:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

All this chitter-chatter, chitter-chatter, chitter-chatter 'bout Shmatta, shmatta, shmatta -- I can't give it away on 7th Avenue This town's been wearing tatters The sole virtue of this piece may be that it provides a cue to quote the Rolling Stones

- josh_y

September 20, 2011 at 9:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Grimes and others wants to ignore the warning signals from Jewish liberals who have legitimate concerns about Obama's affinity for 3rd world leftist and Islamist movements. They may come to regret the way they have needlessly alienated liberal Jewish voters in the 2012 elections. Grimes prefers to change the subject to Jewish Republicans. Chait has positioned himself as a more acceptable house Jew in the leftist media.

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 9:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I would admit that Obama is a bit too friendly to the Palestinian narrative. However, is there anyone of any real prominence who has done anything to challenge it? Did Bush do anything to challenge it? Or did he just refuse to go where its proponents wanted to push it?

- sighthnd

September 20, 2011 at 9:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

R-E-T-I-R-E

- MrCookie1

September 20, 2011 at 10:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Marty reminds me of the LaRouchies. Except for the fact that he has no followers he has definitely degenerated to their level. Hyperbolic, paranoid, immensely self-assured...it is sad. Even the parts where he writes something somewhat factual, he screws it up: The Berber presence has played a role in both the Libyan and Tunisian revolt. But since journalists have barely heard of the Berbers they will not get their due in the media. What utter bullshit, I must have read a hundred articles at least about the Berbers in the Nafusa mountains and how they were working with Arabs for the first time in generations to get rid of Gadhafi, it was from the Nafusa mountains that Gharyan was taken and the road laid open to Zawiya and then Tripoli. Yet Marty, having not bothered to read the media reports, assumes there are none. I couldn't even bring myself to open the second page, it stopped being amusing and quickly got sad, doesn't he have any family to look after him?

- blackton

September 20, 2011 at 10:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Amidut, Contrary to what you write , I wasn't changing the subject to Jewish Republicans. Far from it. Rather, having read the actual piece I was addressing the following: 1) If Marty Peretz cares so much about Israel why doesn't he take the time to at least write at the 10th grade level when defending it? If he's incapable of writing at even the highschool level why then doesn't he work with someone to put his arguments into coherent form? (This is sort of like asking "If Bibi worries so much about the threat of Iraq why does he keep dumping on the administration of his one and only ally?" A real brain-teaser, sure. Though, hey, stupidity and arrogance to the point of constant self-defeating behavior tempered only by indignant delusion would seem to be one possible answer!) Look, if everyone in Israeli history had the arrogance and utter lack of competence we witness in both Marty and Bibi the nation never would've survived. You should be worried that Israel is being defended by such incompetents. 2) The fact that the best writer at TNR has just left and immeidetly posted something that he wouldn't have been able to post at this magazine. (BTW, that writer - Jon Chait - is a hawkish liberal with a long history of supporting and defending Israel.) A piece that totally contradicts all of Marty's premises. http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/09/why_bibi_hates_obama.html 3) The general decline of TNR. The atrocious writing (best exemplified be, but not limited to, the constant embarrassment that is Peretz's prose). The indifference to quality by the editorial staff. And, yes, the departure of its best writer. (See #2)

- mtinora@me.com

September 20, 2011 at 10:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Of course I agree with everyone who says Mr. Peretz has basically become a rabid dog with no sense of logic or proportion. He certainly stands out in a magazine otherwise mainly devoted to reasonable discourse. He wasn't always so crazy (nearly 30 years of reading TNR gives me some right to say that), and used to at least be worth considering. Now I only had to read one sentence in the blurb in the e-mail I got today on the web contents and I knew instantly who wrote it, the text fairly foaming at the mouth as it leaped off the screen at me. If Mr. Peretz is still in any way a rational being, would someone tell him that you don't convince anyone of anything by writing like an enraged psychotic?

- eadrdg

September 20, 2011 at 10:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

One of Obama's problems is that no one is afraid of him or takes him very seriously. Boehner, McConnell, Abbas, Ryan. Why should Netanyahu? The Middle East policy itself, as Marty says, is absurd. But what does it matter when we have a President who "leads from behind."

- JerryL

September 20, 2011 at 10:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Alas, Martin Peretz is so obsessed with Obama he would blame him for the next hurricane. Obama does nothing right. Israel is never subject to criticism despite the many opportunities that Netanyahu has missed and that so many Israeli commentator discuss at great length. Why not at leat an attempt at rational analysis. Obama does not want to go back to 1949 and has never offered anything but negotiation. He has made his share of misjudgments, maybe more than his share, but think of what came before him. Peretz has a good mind. He is very well read. If he would only get some help in becoming less a zealot, less an obssessive, and also be willing to explore Israeli politics as part of the mix he would be a lot more persusive. Anger by itself is not enough.

- rockh99

September 20, 2011 at 10:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Grimes absolutely nails it

- WandreyCer

September 20, 2011 at 10:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We forget: a prophet is never appreciated in his own land, in his own time.

- tivra

September 20, 2011 at 11:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...We forget: a prophet is never appreciated in his own land, in his own time.. Oh so that's it. I've been wondering why I'm not effecting change.

- basman

September 20, 2011 at 11:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"If Bibi worries so much about the threat of Iraq why does he keep dumping on the administration of his one and only ally?" Bibi KEEPS DUMPING on the administration? Where? Are you speaking about real events of actual dumpings that took place in the open air, in the media, in the public square? When people attribute such recklessness to others, I tend to think that in their hearts of hearts they feel that, if they were in the same place, that's what they would do. Perhaps you mean that, in spite of Obama's highly publicized attempts to force Jews from building in Jerusalem, Netanyahu held his ground and said: This is not acceptable to the Jewish people of Israel. In the same way that it would be unacceptable in America to forbid Jews to build and live in Washington. Is this what you mean by "dumping" ?

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 11:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

For the love of God, Marty, please retire. This is just embarrassing.

- K_Wilson

September 20, 2011 at 11:59am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

hmmm, Peretz certainly attracts a mostly different group of commenters on what is essentially a similar topic as Yossi Klein Halevi's TNR post on Israel's "growing isolation". Sophia: Peretz referred specifically to son Saif, not the father. blackton: I tried to follow Libya's Berbers after Zwara was cut off on March 15, and it took a few months before the media finally started to cover the Nafusa Mountain Berbers. I tend to agree with Peretz's sentiment that the transnational Berbers will once again be ignored as the more interesting stories will be about power-sharing and the non-Berber tribes. What is really odd is how the media still never mentions Libya's Touregs, who tend to be allied with Q. noga: yes! see you elswhere. If Peretz is reading his comments, I enjoyed reading these flitting thoughts on the complex map of really the Near East and North Africa, and Obamerica's thumbprints. Wonder what he thinks about Perry's speech this morning. Wonder if Perry added "arrogant" after this was posted. What is really under-reported is Algeria, sitting between Morocco and Tunisia, Libya.

- K2K

September 20, 2011 at 12:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"So I want a Palestine because I want Israelis not to have to burden themselves with an internal population that has neither the coherence of a nation nor a tradition of democratic norms. President Obama is enamored of the current Palestinian narrative, as false as it is self-pitying. This is a simple narrative and an over-simple projection into the future. It assumes that a 1949 map of the cease-fire lines—yes, of course, with appropriate but tiny land exchanges—will assure the peace. I do not think it assures anything except that Israel would be deflected from the art and science of building an ever freer society, a chore—if you’ll forgive me—it has shown some talents in doing. I do not know Obama’s head. Maybe nobody does. But his fervent and fervid clamoring for a simple Israeli route to an independent Palestine misled no people so much as the Palestinians. When he retreated from his formulae, which the PA assumed he could impose on Israel, they were already on an independence high. His somber entreaties could not bring them back to any semblance of reality." Anyone who understands something about the conflict and its two sides knows this to be an astute criticism of Obama's failures in the M-E. It is of course possible that for the Palestinians will not see it in the same way, as Obama's hubristic interventions led to the path they are taking now which they probably consider a success of their diplomacy.

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 12:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mary Peretz is an embarrassment to TNR, to Israel, and to himself. I'm cancelling my subscription today. When he leaves, I'll be back.

- smitchel

September 20, 2011 at 12:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Are you speaking about real events of actual dumpings that took place in the open air, in the media, in the public square?" Well, I don't know what Grimes meant, Noga, but I think addressing Congress was a step in the wrong direction, and certainly fits the bill. As I said on the other thread, if the boot had been on the other foot I don't think Netanyahu would have liked it at all, and he might even have gotten the impression he was being given the finger. It seems, in any case, guaranteed not to improve a relationship.

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 12:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

". Obama is lucky," MSNBC Hardball's Chris Matthews was making the same point yesterday, after a segment about the new Suskind's book. Obama has the talent for luck, which is a prodigious talent, make no mistake about it. But I'm wondering if he could have benefited from a little less luck. His presidency could be the greatest missed opportunity, because it came to him too soon.

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 12:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"As I said on the other thread, if the boot had been on the other foot I don't think Netanyahu would have liked it at all, and he might even have gotten the impression he was being given the finger. It seems, in any case, guaranteed not to improve a relationship." I beg to differ. If Obama came to Israel and addressed the Knesset, I believe everything would have been different. I'm wondering how you make these arrogant assessments (and you an ironist) without even a semblance of an attempt to see these things from an Israeli POV. You just don't get it. Netanyahu is not worried about his self-image. It's Israel's future that guides him. He is a much more genuinely modest person than Obama is. No doubt you will take this comment as me dumping on you, as is your wont. But if you are addressing me directly then don't complain later if you don't like my response.

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 12:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr. Peretz should write an article about baseball or something. The Middle East is going to be an insoluble problem till the end of time. To obsess about it to the point of implying that Obama is wandering in a desert of his own making, because he doesn't do what Peretz wants is to also wander in a desert. My Detroit Tigers won their division this year for the first time since 1987, Marty. Give us a few words about that. Zigzag that straight line of your thought a bit.

- magboy47.

September 20, 2011 at 1:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I just saw someone say they are canceling their subscription. My subscription is in the envelope, unsent. Should I mail it? What are the reasons for TNR existing? What are the reasons for closing the magazine down? Should there be a daily post by Martin Peretz declaiming about Israel with that title? Should there be a daily collection of all furious anti-Israel anti-Jewish comments by writers such as JAIMECHUCH (there seem to be several but I haven't bothered to collect their screen names), not deleted, but segregated in one area so we can all admire or appreciate or ignore as pleases us?

- skahn

September 20, 2011 at 2:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree with Arnon and a few others that this is a pretty good essay. In fact I'm hard pressed to understand the vitriol it against Peretz that it generates. It misreads Peretz here to say that he he says that Obama is to blame for all the atters or that he could do much about them. Rather, ultimaltely, this is a consistently argued. knowing and spritely analysis of Turkey's emerging stab at prominence in the region and, the argument goes, Obama's misconceptions in relation to it. 09/20/2011 - 5:52am EDT | tahirjon is is reasonably balanced take on Peretz's essay. My point, to repeat, is while there is plenty to disagree with in what Peretz writes, he surely overdoes the Obama knocking, the vitriol against him is unawarranted and there is more to gain from reading this essay than there is to lose.

- basman

September 20, 2011 at 2:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I feel the moment is ripe for a Wodehouse impression: "Tatters!" I should make it clear that my involuntary cry was not in response to the sight of a severely damaged suit of clothes on any of the guests at the garden party -- and indeed it is part of the code of the Woosters not to make any kind of animadversions regarding the outward coverings of one's peers, no matter what state they are in -- but was rather expressing a surprised greeting at the speedy advance in my direction of Reginald Tattersall, my old school chum and now a successful journalist on the other side of the Pond. He had, the gossip reported, made quite a career on The New Republic, some kind of earnest, long-winded publication based, by all accounts, in Washington. I turned to Jeeves, knowing I needed some fast expert advice, and asked him whether he had any knowledge of that worthy publication. The man, as I expected, did not fail me. "I do, sir," he explained, "it is a reputable journal of political, social, and cultural opinion and analysis, founded I believe in 1914. I had occasion during our trip to United States last year to peruse a couple of issues and found it to provide some hours of informative reading. The articles on the economic implications of the somewhat unusual policies pursued by President Roosevelt's new administration were quite engrossing, sir." "Rather you than me, Jeeves!" I said with feeling. "I'd get a dashed headache from that." "Indeed, sir," replied Jeeves with his usual imperturbability. And, with that, Reginald Tattersall was upon us. He grabbed my hand with transatlantic enthusiasm. "Bertie Wooster!" "Tatters!"

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 2:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"It was never Obama's Middle East, and isn't it always in tatters?" There are tatters and then there are worse tatters. Obama barged into a bad situation and made it worse.

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 2:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As far as i am concerned I am sick of the Middle East and you all can go to hell!!

- ljb6599

September 20, 2011 at 2:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

....As far as i am concerned I am sick of the Middle East and you all can go to hell... Too little too late: my life is a living hell. In fact I've been down so long it looks like up to me. But thanks for the good wishes in any event and your permission to enter the nether regions and, implicitly, I take it, to have a bon voyage.

- basman

September 20, 2011 at 2:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thanks to amidut for this gem: "While there is much to criticize about Obama's quixotic Middle East policy, Marty Peretz and others need to offer alternative solutions. I would like to begin with the suggestion that the Democrats nominate someone different for President in 2012, someone not sentimental about his Islamic heritage nor influenced by the outsized influence of Islam on Chicago Black politics." So then, should Obama be ashamed of his Islamic heritage? Should he go out of his way to criticize his own upbringing? Is there any particular reason why people with Islamic heritage should not be part of the national discourse or hold political office? Furthermore, is there a problem with blacks in Chicago being influenced by Islam? Is there such a thing as "Chicago Black politics?" Is that somehow different from regular Chicago politics? Imagine if you will, the shitstorm that would have descended upon this thread had someone suggested (as it is often inappropriately suggested) that there was an outsized Jewish influence on American politics. Or if someone had suggested that say, Joe Lieberman should not be in politics, being "sentimental" about his Jewish heritage. Like it or not, muslims make up a large portion of the world's community, and I personally welcome their inclusion in the diversity of American politics, as I hope do most liberals.

- bunthorne

September 20, 2011 at 2:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, s'il vous plait! Of course I don't think merely disagreeing with me is "dumping on" me. That would be ridiculous. I think dumping is when you occasionally ascribe strange or pathological motives to my comments or arguments that are without foundation and far from any reality either of us might recognize. So, in the broader sense of things, I also think it is a great pity that the president didn't go to Israel as part of his desire to shake up (or out) frozen positions and parties. I'm not sure that it would have panned out with Netanyahu in charge, but still, it would have made both O. and N. think about what they wanted their interaction to achieve. I'm not arguing at all that Netanyahu is only thinking of his image. I'm quite ready to believe that he believes that what he does is in the Israeli national interest. My problem is that what he does seems to be often short-sighted, lacking in strategic nous, and geared to a somewhat morbid domestic political framework that means his government is in thrall to parties with a somewhat inflexible vision of the future. Neither do I think that I ignore the Israeli POV, although I tend to see things from this (U.S.) perspective. But here's a question -- is there only one Israeli POV? It seems to me that having the PM be unable to construct a reasonable relationship with the American president is a problem not solved by assigning the blame to the American side only. Is it ignoring the Israeli POV to say that out loud, or are there Israelis who might concur in part, knowing Netanyahu's style?

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 3:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

To bunthorne: Do you welcome Islam even though it is antithetical to liberal values?

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 3:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

tristan. you are a paid iranian/hamas blogger. You can not accept the truth. Barack Hussein Obama is very proud of his Moslem ancestry, he said it loud and clear at his Cairo speech. He bent to the Saudi king. If you can not handle the truth as it is go read and blog in the new york times. The characteristics of Moslems are very clear they hide the truth, they are back knifers, they promulgate hate towards Israel, Jews, Christians. They kill their own people constantly and persistently. Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran. You have to deal with this reality. This is the truth.

- JAIMECHUCH

September 20, 2011 at 3:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Amidut: Certainly there are aspects of Islam that, if followed devoutly, lead to beliefs and behaviours antithetical to liberal values. The same could be said about most religions. Certainly, too, following the appearance of Islam, the world has had to deal in varying degrees of urgency with the actions of fanatical followers of Islam. We are currently in the midst of a particularly tumultous period in that history. However, as I said above, we must come to terms with the fact that muslims make up a large and continuously growing proportion of the world population. We must hope that the elements within Islam whose beliefs and actions are at the very least compatible with our liberal values come to dominate. If we state, without any consideration, that muslims, or even those with a muslim background are not welcome to have a voice in democratic government, then the dominance of the radicals and the radicalization of the moderates inevitably follows.

- bunthorne

September 20, 2011 at 3:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

tristan. you are a paid iranian/hamas blogger. Or a fool. I think the latter. You have no comments so you attack the person. Bigotry for your info is when you tell lies about a group of people. Not when you tell the truth. You can not accept the truth. Barack Hussein Obama is very proud of his Moslem ancestry, he said it loud and clear at his Cairo speech. He bent to the Saudi king. If you can not handle the truth as it is go read and blog in the new york times. The characteristics of Moslems are very clear they hide the truth, they are back knifers, they promulgate hate towards Israel, Jews, Christians. They kill their own people constantly and persistently. Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran. You have to deal with this reality. This is the truth. I am glad you are nauseated. As I can see you have no contributions at all. Shallow mind. You can not post anything of value. Ignorance is no excuse. Stupidity neither. Put some blood in your veins. Make comments do not attack the person. Read the Wikipedia, read the news, educate yourself.

- JAIMECHUCH

September 20, 2011 at 3:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"It seems to me that having the PM be unable to construct a reasonable relationship with the American president is a problem not solved by assigning the blame to the American side only." Someone has a visceral aversion to you, you are not going to be able to construct "a reasonable relationship " with him no matter what you do or say. And Netanyahu did say things, clearly, that should have been music to Obama's ears had he the slightest inclination to listen carefully, or had he been able to break from his impregnable view of Israel as the villain of the story. I put it to you that Obama is pretty closed to Israeli perspective; Netanyahu just happens to be very conveniently unpopular enough with Democrats (Clinton's legacy) for this to become something of a hot potato. Nobody wants to be the one to touch it; it is so unfashionable to criticize Obama. Marty is so much the exception in this magazine that you can see the kind of jeers and wrath he draws for saying it like it is. As for the Israeli POV,: where there are two Israelis there are 4 POV's but you will find that there is a consensus with regard to Obama; he is generally not regarded as a staunch friend by almost all except for the hard-core Leftists. "When Obama raised a hammer over Israel and demanded a total settlement freeze, without signaling what is the onus on the other party and when, he failed to get Israelis to see things his way, even those Israelis who basically agree with his policies and habitually raise an automatic cheer to any peace plan. The greater the pressure exerted upon Israelis, the more they will resist "being duped" and will insist on showing you "what's what". They know their neighborhood. Israeli abrasiveness can easily be transformed into a sweeping willingness to deal with any challenge even if it comes with a steep price. But they want to know there is something to work for."

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 4:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I accept that there is blame for both sides but I really do not believe that Obama is trying to "dupe" Israel, nor do I think there is any evidence for him regarding Israel as the "villain." But did you like my P.G. Wodehouse effort?

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 4:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Bunthorne. I don't dispute that Muslims should have the same rights as all other citizens. But they are not immune to questions about their values and their commitement to our system of government vs. Shariah. And if they want to be elected to public office, they have to earn the trust of their fellow citizens. Islam is a religion and political system, not an ethnic group. 78% of the Jewish vote (including yours truly) went to Obama in 2008. Although I'm not totally surprised by Obama's behavior, I was willing to give him a chance and was (still am) unhappy with the GOP. I am now dismayed by his tilt to the Muslim Brotherhood, Erdogan, and the PLO, coldness to Israel and generally shambling confused Middle East policy. Muslims may not like America's support for Israel. They can live with it. But if they perceive that America is chiseling away at the Israel position, they will exploit every opportunity. Islam is not immune to critical study. By all means, study the Koran and other Islamic scriptures. Study the history of Islam. Many people identify as Muslims even if they are not fervent believers. Apostasy is punishable by death. Something like the Mafia. Hard to ease out of it. Millions of people once professed Communism. It hollowed out. That may be happening to Islam in some places. Millions of Iranians are sick and tired of it. Iran has a rich pre-Islamic culture. There was life before Islam and there will be life after Islam.

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 4:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I always thought it was Marty's Middle East, not Obama's or anyone else's.

- wildboy

September 20, 2011 at 4:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"But did you like my P.G. Wodehouse effort?" A very authentic impression. What has occasioned this mellow mood, may I ask? Have you been sipping from cognac you keep at the back of the left drawer in your escritoire?

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 4:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"When Obama raised a hammer over Israel and demanded a total settlement freeze, without signaling what is the onus on the other party So Noga, do you favor the building of new settlements in the West Bank or not? I am not talking about J'slem but the West Bank. I have zero problem with Obama wanting a freeze, in fact I would prefer a dismantling of them, I want Israel to up and draw the lines as envisioned by Barak back in 2000 and stick to them. It is one thing for Israel to militarily occupy the West Bank, they could do that forever for all I care, the same in Gaza. The US did that in Germany after WW2, I simply can't accept building settlements on land that Israel claims it doesn't even want as a bargaining chip. And as to the rest of the Middle East, it is more than just Israel. I, for one, am delighted by the events in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt. No people should live in tyranny or autocracy. I don't know how it will play out in these 3 countries but gettting rid of the Gadhafi clan IS A Goddamn huge victory for Americans as that bastard ordered the bombing of Pan Am 103. As to Turkey, how their own domestic situation plays out is not within the power of Obama or America, this delusion of Marty that it somehow is is just nuts. The EU did not want Turkey to join, this was taken as an insult by plenty of Turks who have then turned inwards and as a result brought about Erdogan. This is Democracy. The Turkish economy has also been doing very well under Erdogan, yet Marty does not mention that once, this in the face of economic woes throughout the western world. Marty claims to want a Palestinian state, yet he makes no proposals how to do it, he only mentions it because he seems to think that Palestinians are incapable of Democracy or civilization and therefore are below the dignity of the superior Israelis. Now I have no idea if a Palestine would be a Democracy or a free state, that is for the Palestinians to work out, and if they wage war against Israel then Israel is within its right to militarily occupy them, if they do however they should set up Democratic institutions and remove from power any elected leaders who do not adhere to them but they do not have the right to settle on their territory. Myself, I say force the state of Palestine on them and build a high wall and then tell the Palestinians to go fuck themselves and the rest of the world until the Palestinians recognize them. Why the hell is this so hard to do?

- blackton

September 20, 2011 at 5:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"So Noga, do you favor the building of new settlements in the West Bank or not? I am not talking about J'slem but the West Bank" Obama's huge mistake was to include Jerusalem in his settlement-freeze demand, and make it a PRE-CONDITION for negotiations. I do not favour settlements in the WB, but only as commonsense, not because I think for a second that there is any justification for Jews to be forbidden to live at the heart of their historic homeland.

- NR165279

September 20, 2011 at 5:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sorry, the 5:39pm EDT | NR165279 is me

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 5:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Weird.

- basman

September 20, 2011 at 5:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad "I accept that there is blame for both sides but I really do not believe that Obama is trying to "dupe" Israel, nor do I think there is any evidence for him regarding Israel as the "villain."" You'll never convince Noga or the Commentary crowd of this. They still think Obama is a secret Muslim.

- arnon

September 20, 2011 at 6:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Weird' Nothing Noga posts surprises me.

- arnon

September 20, 2011 at 6:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree with noga about Obama's "visceral aversion" to PM Netanyahu, and, at 5:39 pm "Obama's huge mistake was to include Jerusalem in his settlement-freeze demand, and make it a PRE-CONDITION for negotiations." I continue to be more specific in the latter because the too-public 'outrage' over the new apartments in Ramat Shlomo was completely STUPID in that Ramat Shlomo is in NORTH Jerusalem, but east of the 1948 armistice line, and Ramat Shlomo had been developed on a rocky hillside previously used for arab muslim GOAT grazing. Obama's policy to Israel has indeed been "naive, arrogant, misguided, and dangerous" As to Turkey - it seems to be very difficult to expel a member of the NATO alliance. Does not mean the US has to continue to deploy or hand over sensitive technologies until Erdogan's phony economic miracle finally leads either to 1) AKP out of power, or 2) AKP assuming emergency powers and Erdogan or a proxy as autocrat for life. Might not be enough time for the Kurdish population growth to get the Kurds and Alevis to do a reverse-Ataturk and expel the foreign occupiers of Anatolia - the Turks.

- K2K

September 20, 2011 at 6:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

arnon - I have never thought "Obama is a secret Muslim". I continue to believe he is a secular humanist who is delusional in believing in postmodern multicultural transnationalism. Even a casual observer of geo-politics notices the steady rise of nationalism leading to devolution from Scotland to South Sudan.

- K2K

September 20, 2011 at 6:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And Arnon believes Netanyahu is a not-so-secret Judeo-Nazi.

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 6:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama is averse to Netanyahu because N comports himself with dignity and stands up for his people. He is not a vassal. I cannot say the same for O's court Jews. I used to share Blackton's concern about Jewish settlements. I was appalled when the settlements began. Now I only care about whether or not they strengthen Israel's geo-strategic position. With the Middle East in flux today, Israel needs all the maneuvering room, air space and natural barriers (Jordan Valley, Golan Heights, Judean-Samarian hills, etc.) it can muster. The Muslims have amply displayed their bad faith and expressed their genocidal intentions without inhibition. Super-duper high tech defense systems cannot provide full protection. So, deterrence must come in multiple forms and layers.

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 7:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, I'm generally mellow. Well, not always, but more than you believe. And just because I can spell "s'il vous plait" doesn't mean I know what an escritoire is or even that I need to hide the cognac in my own home and really there is no ideological aspect to what drawer it's in, left or right!!! Sorry, got carried away there for a second.

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 7:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama comports himself with dignity too, and I get the impression Netanyahu doesn't quite know how to deal with it. I think it's a great pity that the relationship wasn't more productive, but if the PM is banking ultimately on President Perry or whoever taking over in 2013, then it's a lot of chips to place on a risky number.

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 7:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You should give Netanyahu some credit, ironyroad. Obama has always struck me as very standoffish in relation to Netanyahu, (compare and contrast with his warm glad-handing the odious Chavez). It should give you pause to wonder how come. Shades of Khalidi, I would say. I saw Khalidi on Charlie rose the other night, following the pogrom at the Israeli Embassy. He was restraining himself not to say much that was outlandish but , being who he is, it came out at the very end, when he said something like: ... The Israelis killed five Egyptian soldiers. What did they expect ... ? You don't remain for years friends with a person who thinks this way about Israelis and escape that influence unscathed.

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 7:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And how about Obama's deep bow to King what's his name of Saudi Arabia?

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 8:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga1 "And Arnon believes Netanyahu is a not-so-secret Judeo-Nazi." You are full of shit. This is typical and typically vile noga assertion.

- arnon

September 20, 2011 at 8:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

amidut "And how about Obama's deep bow to King what's his name of Saudi Arabia?" The deep bow was a typical commoner's reaction to diplomatic rigidity. It has no other meaning. Deep bow or not, Bush gave in to Saudi influence more often and more devastatingly than Obama ever did. Did Bush confront the Saudis on their support for radical Wahhabi teaching institutions anywhere in the world?

- arnon

September 20, 2011 at 8:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The hypocrite: arnon: "You'll never convince Noga or the Commentary crowd of this. They still think Obama is a secret Muslim." Noga: "And Arnon believes Netanyahu is a not-so-secret Judeo-Nazi."" Arnon: "You are full of shit. This is typical and typically vile noga assertion." Decency is not really your forte, is it, Tartuffe?

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 9:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"You should give Netanyahu some credit, ironyroad." Noga, I think that I have said on more than one occasion -- for example, a couple of hours ago -- that I don't believe all the fault is on one side. And I'll give you the standoffishness, but I think that N. severely misjudged Obama and thought he could scare him into "good" behavior. But until someone explains to me how Netanyahu isn't in hock to the minority parties who are keeping his government alive, I'll continue to look somewhat skeptically at the long-term thinking (the lack of it, to be more precise) coming out of Jerusalem in recent years. As Tom Friedman said quite succinctly and correctly a few days ago, the Israeli government hasn't give this administration much to work with while demanding and receiving assistance on every front. Allies are supposed to work in both directions.

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 9:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't know where you get your information from, ironyroad. Do you actually believe that "N. severely misjudged Obama and thought he could scare him into "good" behavior."?? Is this the measure of your respect for Obama, making him sound like some hapless schoolboy vis a vis Netanyahu? Are we supposed to feel sorry for poor, bullied Obama now? Give me a break. I would recommend smaller doses of Friedman, if you are genuinely interested in understanding what's going on.

- noga1

September 20, 2011 at 9:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Irony recites his canard that N has not given O enough to work with. What is enough? Where are the Arab concessions? It's not unreasonable to expect that they recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people. They have refused. Yes, N keeps minority parties in his coalition because that's how Israeli democracy (a parliamentary system) works. The minority parties probably give Prime Minister N the needed flexibility to implement his programs and policies and stand up to external pressures. N works for Israel, not President O or Irony. It is obvious that Obama cares not at all about Israel's security. He has his Arab masters and now Prime Minister Erdogan. He is so eager to please them. Netanyahu's opposition, chiefly Kadima (Livni, etc), is a ragtag bunch of yuppie-style opportunists who don't deserve the Israeli people's respect and trust. Tom Friedman is a shallow huckster. It's no accident that he writes Middle East commentary, along with that craven dishonest Roger Cohen, for the historically anti-Zionist NY Times. Irony is being disingenuous. Like Obama, he really wants to bring down the Netanyahu government by imposing unreasonable demands on it and ushering in that more pliable group of Israeli yuppies and professional surrender advocates like Yossi Beilin. To heck with Israeli democracy. Bei1in's 1993 Oslo gambit was been a complete failure.

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 9:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga1 "The hypocrite" Noga the pig. She spends her days on antisemitic islamic and nazi like websites from dawn to dusk. She even visits some of these websites written in Arabic and uses google translation service to repost these comments on the TNR forums. Noga has only one mode of counter-argument: reduce anyone's argument. Pretend that there is no difference between the commenter and those written on the antisemitic websites she habituates. The she thinks that calling me a Tartuffe she has said something profound. She knows of no other example of hypocrisy in world literature. Noga is the least intelligent poster here. She is all pretense and attitude, no substance.

- arnon

September 20, 2011 at 10:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

amidut "Irony recites his canard that N has not given O enough to work with. What is enough? Where are the Arab concessions?" I don't know what the argument is about. Tom Friedman is not the last word on any subject much less the Arab Israeli conflict. I don't think that Netanyahu is at fault because Abbas has decided on a new tactic to try and delegitimize Israel. Still, Netanyahu could have handled the situation better than he did. His one tactic is to stall till the coming election hoping that Obama will lose and the Republicans will gain control of the White House. What if the Republican candidate turns out to be a Ron Paul type isolationist. Does he think that a disengaged Washington will be in Israel's interest? Does anyone here?

- arnon

September 20, 2011 at 10:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"N works for Israel, not President O or Irony. It is obvious that Obama cares not at all about Israel's security . . . . He has his Arab masters and now Prime Minister Erdogan. Right. And, as in the case of Netanyahu and Israel, Obama works for the United States of America, amidut, and for me and for you (I assume). Is this a surprising discovery for anyone here? But it does not impede and has not impeded a dynamic alliance based on common interests. Your comment about "Arab masters" comes close to disqualifying you for any intelligent exchange. Don't talk nonsense.

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 10:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: "Are we supposed to feel sorry for poor, bullied Obama now?" No, not at all. And I'm puzzled how even a minimally attentive reading of my comment would lead to that conclusion. I said that N. made a misjudgment (and I've no inside scoop, I'm just looking from the outside so I could be wrong) and, although the context is much wider than a personal interaction, it's worth noting that.

- ironyroad

September 20, 2011 at 10:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is a hectoring Jew-baiting tone to Irony's discourse. "Why can't you people give more?" he wants to know. He has been answered. He deserves no further response. Obama fans such as Irony will have no one to blame except themselves if Obama loses the Jewish vote next year. It is theirs to lose. Their sneering condescension, exaggerated sense of entitlement, and now un-veiled bigotry will make it possible. Obama and Hillary Clinton have blundered their way through the Middle East. Many patriotic Americans, both Jewish and non-Jewish, believe that.

- amidut

September 20, 2011 at 11:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, dear, this has degenerated into a flame war almost as bad as in the glory days of pre-WWW newsgroups. Now, let's see. What do we want? I presume for the people of the Middle East to learn to live together in a reasonable degree of peace, with a reasonable degree of sharing of scarce resources (especially water) despite a variety of religious and political backgrounds and beliefs. Even with great intelligence and great good will, this would be an immense challenge. Now, as several of us commented on another thread, posting comments here at TNR is not likely to do much to bring this about. But at the very least we could at least model some of the behavior we advocate. That is, frankly expressing different opinions and points of view without going to war (in this case virtual "flame war") where we trade insults and allegations. Can we not behave as we wish the Israelis, Arabs, Turks, Iranians Palestinians, etc. to behave? Can we not (like adult parents in a troubled marriage with squabbling children) at the very least set a good example? Come on, now; not in front of the children!!!

- skahn

September 20, 2011 at 11:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Surely Obama's Islamophiliac, anti-Israel foreign policy will invoke its well-deserved backlash. It already has in Brooklyn. Obama's gut level ideology is anti-white, anti-Western, Marxist and pro-Islam. Anybody who reads his history and biography should know that. Of course to the majority of the people who comment on the New Republic fora Obama's ideology is a feature, not a bug. The biggest threat to Western Civilization is not Al Qaeda. It is the moral decadence, the cowardice, the ignorance, the stupidity of the liberal pimps who dominate academia and journalism. Liberals disagree, but liberals have often been wrong before. According to the liberals of the time Stalin was an enlightened despot trying to modernize Russian. Mao was an agrarian reformer. Castro wanted to be a liberal Democrat but the greedy US capitalists wouldn't let him. According to the cretins who write for the "mainstream" media, say the neo-Stalinist New York Times, the Arabs want to transform Israel into Denmark, but the wicked Israelis won't let them. The typical New Republic commenter believes those idiocies, or more likely pretend to believe them. Human stupidity is infinite, and "liberalism" approaches infinity in that regard. Any Jew who votes for Barack Hussein Obama is voting for a second Holocaust. Period. Any American who votes for the Obamessiah is voting for the destruction of the United States, the last, best hope of mankind.

- bulbman1066

September 21, 2011 at 12:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"There is a hectoring Jew-baiting tone to Irony's discourse." Amidut, I don't know about hectoring, but how on earth is asking whether your own comment about Netanyahu's responsibility to Israel points inevitably to Obama's responsibility to the United States, "Jew-baiting"? I mean, I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm just asking whether you've considered their full implications. I notice, however, that you evade the basic issue.

- ironyroad

September 21, 2011 at 1:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What you said ironyroad and which triggered my response on poor bullied Obama was more than just "N. made a misjudgment". You explained what you meant in this colorful and provocative manner: "N. severely misjudged Obama and thought he could scare him into "good" behavior." A bully scares people into "good" behaviour and a bully often makes misjudgments about those he victimizes. Hence, Obama is the bullied victim of N., no less, in this narrative. This type of language is much more suitable to one or two other posters on this blog and it always takes me by surprise to hear it coming from you. And furthermore, if you want to fulminate, fulminate away. But please please don't pretend that you were not fulminating when pointed out to you and then go all offended and hurt and fed up on me.

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 6:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Amidut: When you accused ironyroad of serving his "Arab masters", you lost any right to indignation at his hint about double loyalties (which I presume you meant when you said Jew baiting etc). As it happens, you couldn't be more wrong in your perception. Ironyroad is one of the good guys and I say this as someone who disagrees with him much more often than not. ___________ skahn: Spare us the Rodney King cliches. "Can we not behave as we wish the Israelis, Arabs, Turks, Iranians Palestinians, etc. to behave?" Israelis behave like "Arabs, Turks, Iranians Palestinians, ", do they? Writing Charters whose objective is genocide and destruction, threatening to annihilate other countries for the sin of existence, denying the Holocaust, making bellicose threats and conducting pogroms on embassies in Tel Aviv, right?

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 7:10am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Noga the pig. She spends her days on antisemitic islamic and nazi like websites from dawn to dusk. She even visits some of these websites written in Arabic and uses google translation service to repost these comments on the TNR forums. Noga has only one mode of counter-argument: reduce anyone's argument. Pretend that there is no difference between the commenter and those written on the antisemitic websites she habituates. The she thinks that calling me a Tartuffe she has said something profound. She knows of no other example of hypocrisy in world literature. Noga is the least intelligent poster here. She is all pretense and attitude, no substance." This is the product of the soft brain of the petty cyber-bully, incapable of dealing with its own serious shortcomings, while imagining it is in excellent, sharp-shooting shape.

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 7:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

While reading this arrogant diatribe, I wavered between disgust with, and concern about, someone who is so obviously living in a sadly distorted universe, -- one that is possibly leading to destruction of our civilization -- and has the mouthpiece he does. I guess that's what freedom of speech is about... To say that "I want Israelis not to have to burden themselves with an internal population that has neither the coherence of a nation nor a tradition of democratic norms," is astounding (among many of his off-the-wall statements). So when have the Palestinians had a chance to evolve into a democratic state? The author seems to be clueless about the humanity of the Palestinians or to have any sensitivity to their true plight brought on by Israel's own fixation on ITS victimhood. From moving in and taking over Palestinian ancestral lands, to failing to respond in a compassionate, constructive way to the Palestinian's natural anger over being displaced (I'd be mad as hell...), to the conditions they are forced to live under today, and yes to the continued threats Israel still faces after 63 years, it's a tragedy. From start to now. To blame Pres. Obama for Israel's dysfunction leaves me incredulous. To somehow expect him to pull peace out of the mess the Israelis have created is delusional. When are the Israelis going to look in the mirror and realize that they've become what they fear the most? When are they going to take responsibility for a real peace and stop playing dangerous games?

- sustaingai

September 21, 2011 at 7:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: "This is the product of the soft brain of the petty cyber-bully,..." This vile poster spends her time browsing antisemitic websites reposts their crap here and calls other posters "cyber-bullies."

- arnon

September 21, 2011 at 7:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

overnight match goes to noga and amidut. This Peretz post is linked this morning at both RCPolitics and RCWorld (most read in last 24 hours) with the title "How Obama Unleashed the Turkey Menace" Time to fix some breakfast so I can eat and listen to Obama's speech at the UN at 10am. Hoping he avoids calling for regime change in Israel :)

- K2K

September 21, 2011 at 9:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good essay. Is old good Chamberlain still alive? The core problems: leaders who underwrite Wahhabism, Islamism, Ultra-Right-Wingism, and Ultra-Left-Wingism. Where is the intelligent liberal center minus suicidal pacifism?

- sf4200

September 21, 2011 at 10:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

good speech and delivery by Obama to the UN. Appreciate the consistent citation of South Sudan as the real path to self-determination and statehood, which Susan Rice has also been stressing. He did not mention Turkey. in other news, seems like France will also veto in the UNSC. amazing that CNN can only view Obama's speech impact on "Jewish voters".

- K2K

September 21, 2011 at 10:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga -- not fulminating. Scout's honor. Rarely happens (here at least -- you should see me in domestic space when something really gets on my goat). Also, to be fair, I think amidut meant that Obama, not me, is serving those Arab masters. And, for you, amidut: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaPBhxXhprg

- ironyroad

September 21, 2011 at 10:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

irony has a pet goat? lovely! I mean it - I always donate a goat every year thru Heifer International. irony - I know you meant "when something really gets my goat", not "gets on my goat" just caught Obama and Netanyahu together at UN. Obama really tried to unstiffen his body language, but it would have been nice to actually see him smile when he shakes Bibi's hand.

- K2K

September 21, 2011 at 12:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I was prepared not to like this post by Mr. Peretz, but instead it was such an incomprehensible, interminable, irrational rant that I couldn't even tell what it was saying, except that Peretz hates Obama and feels Israel can do no wrong. It leaves me to wonder how much longer TNR is going to keep publishing this crap, at least without exercising some sort of editorial control. As far as I am concerned, all that needs to be said right now is that Obama's biggest mis- take in the Middle East was not telling Israel and Netanyahu to go fly a kite a year or two ago when it became clear that building of settlements was not going to stop and Israel was going to do nothing to advance the peace process. Now Obama is just making a fool of himself, trying to bargain with Abbas' on Israel's behalf when they have given him nothing to bargain with. The President should just step aside and let the world decide. Netanyahu has alienated Turkey and almost every other friend Israel ever had (not to mention his own citizens), and there is no reason for the President to put himself in the same untenable position.

- mlottman

September 21, 2011 at 12:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good catch, K2K. As it happens, I have two. I named them after obscure 19th century American presidents (yeah, like you thought "Rutherford B. Hayes!" with no prompting!). One I keep in my office, which in turn helps to reduce the number of students coming to see me at all hours of the day.

- ironyroad

September 21, 2011 at 12:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"... but it would have been nice to actually see him smile when he shakes Bibi's hand." You mean. like this? http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_gHXgmEt_uV8/TT3Ie26qXTI/AAAAAAAABSw/HC5Eh-3txkg/s400/obama-chavez.jpg

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 2:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"This vile poster spends her time browsing antisemitic websites reposts their crap here and calls other posters "cyber-bullies." These are not antisemitic websites. These are Arab websites written in English, in which anti-Israel, anti-Zionist and antisemitism are all rolled into one big bulky vociferous unabashed argument. I actually am interested in reading what the Arabs say themselves, not what others tell me they say or mean. I guess it is too rich for your phlegmatic constitution. It is so much easier to borrow from Martin Kramer's or Harry's Place, than to make any effort at some genuine autonomous research.

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 2:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad: Have you seen this? http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/magazine/94947/harold-bloom-the-anatomy-of-influence It's our old friends who calls Charlie Rose "Charles" and always takes care to look like an unmade bed.

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 2:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This should satisfy even Marty Peretz: "United Nations, Sept 21 – U.S. President Barack Obama said Wednesday speeches and resolutions at the United Nations would not bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians: only they themselves could ultimately bridge their differences. In a speech to the United Nations General Assembly, Obama did not refer directly to a Palestinian unilateral drive to win recognition as a state from the world body, which the United States opposes. Instead, he focused on the need for the parties to negotiate and for Arabs to stop teaching their children to hate Israelis. Expressing an unbreakable commitment to Israeli security, Obama declared that any lasting peace must acknowledge the threats Israelis faced every day of their lives. “Israel is surrounded by neighbors that have waged repeated wars against it. Israel’s citizens have been killed by rockets fired at their houses and suicide bombs on their buses. Israel’s children come of age knowing that throughout the region, other children are taught to hate them. “Israel, a small country of less than eight million people, looks out at a world where leaders of much larger nations threaten to wipe it off of the map. The Jewish people carry the burden of centuries of exile, persecution, and the fresh memory of knowing that six million people were killed simply because of who they were.” Obama said Israel’s Arab neighbors should recognize the Jewish state. “The Jewish people have forged a successful state in their historic homeland. Israel deserves recognition. It deserves normal relations with its neighbors. And friends of the Palestinians do them no favors by ignoring this truth,” he said...." http://www.theisraelproject.org/site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?c=ewJXKcOUJlIaG&b=7712195&ct=11229187¬oc=1&tr=y&auid=9537089

- arnon

September 21, 2011 at 3:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga -- yes, indeed, I noticed it in passing. A weird photo. Haven't had time to read it yet this week, though.

- ironyroad

September 21, 2011 at 3:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm pretty pleased with Obama's speech, especially these parts: "Israel is surrounded by neighbors that have waged repeated wars against it. Israel’s citizens have been killed by rockets fired at their houses and suicide bombs on their buses. Israel’s children come of age knowing that throughout the region, other children are taught to hate them." "The Jewish people have forged a successful state in their historic homeland. " Let's see the price tag.

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 3:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

By the way -- anyone who's interested -- what do you make of British foreign secretary William Hague's fulsome praise of Turkey's foreign minister Davutoglu on the Charlie Rose show this week? "He's the person I spend most of my time on the phone with" was one enthusiastic comment I recall.

- ironyroad

September 21, 2011 at 5:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

By the way -- anyone who's interested -- what do you make of British foreign secretary William Hague's fulsome praise of Turkey's foreign minister Davutoglu on the Charlie Rose show this week? "He's the person I spend most of my time on the phone with" was one enthusiastic comment I recall.

- ironyroad

September 21, 2011 at 5:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, it seems to be the latest fashion for political leaders to develop friendships. William Hague keeps in constant touch with Ahmet Davutoglu, Netanyahu and Papandreu speak at least once a week. Two sons of former empires; two sons of former protectorates of said former empires.

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 5:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Let's see the price tag." It won't be as steep as the one's the Republican, especially the Tea Party, will extract. I say this because for critics of Obama on Israel are not thinking about Israel they are thinking about economic policy. The last thing they want is a peace between Israelis and Arabs.

- arnon

September 21, 2011 at 6:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Just now Hanan Ashrawi on CNN: "It's been 64 years since Israel was established on Palestinian land" followed by a roster of the usual lies. And scolding Obama for talking about Jewish history and sympathizing with him because he had come under such terrible pressure from some people, she doesn't know who but they are even more right-wing than Netanyahu's government. Please note the 64 years giveaway. And then there is this: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/palestinian-logo-suggests-elimination-israel_594027.html "The logo of “the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations” – on their website and on top of their official statements at the U.N. – shows the Palestinian Authority’s claim to a Palestine that stretches throughout the entire historical entity of the former Palestine mandate. "

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 7:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's a bit interesting that Mr. Peretz does not mention the President's Secretary of State in this piece. During the Democratic Primaries, Secretary Clinton portryed herself as a world traveller and knew these folks. In a dangersous world she was ready to take the 2:00 am phone calls. Is it President Obama's arrogance or the Secretary's irrelevance that is the cause for her ommision in this piece?

- CRS9TNR

September 21, 2011 at 7:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdqoMKZaTxU&feature=player_embedded

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 7:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Who cares what Hanan Ashrawi says on this issue. The important point is that Obama for the first time in a long time spoke not just of a Palestinian-Israeli conflict but of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The changes the dynamics of the debate. It's the Arabs (the Arab League) as much as the Palestinian Arabs that have made war on Israel and have not allowed for compromise.

- arnon

September 21, 2011 at 8:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

irony: a pet goat is useful in being able to say "my goat ate my paper before it could be published". If you have two, just name them Dewey and Truman. (my favorite dog movie is "Eight Below" and the twins had those names) Hanan Ashrawi was given a free ride by Candy Crowley on CNN, which was sad because Crowley is a very tough interviewer on her Sunday morning talk show. I was stunned that Crowley did not challenge anything, especially the inconvenient fact that Abbas can not even hold local town council elections and Hamas seems opposed to the Abbas UN play. Of course, I made the mistake of listening to National Palestinian Radio from 5 - 5:30 when the second reporter (Frenkel?) covered the 'Itamar settler attacks' without mentioning the Fogel family massacre in Itamar on March 11 "...father Ehud (Udi) Fogel, the mother Ruth Fogel, and three of their six children—Yoav, 11, Elad, 4, and Hadas, the youngest, a three-month-old infant, who was decapitated. ..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_attack and I had also endured Zbig on PBS. noga: no, I wanted a smile with teeth like Obama has when he is with Abbas, not a tight grin with Chavez. What is really intriguing me about the possibility of a UNSC vote is that I have to think China, Russia, and India REALLY do not want to vote, because it would set a precedent for Tibet, Taiwan, the Uighurs; Chechnya; Kashmir; and a few other people's who want self-determination. France is clearly trying to avoid a vote in the UNSC. as to Hague and Turkey? gee, maybe the Brits think they are back in the 19th century trying to solve "the Eastern Question".

- K2K

September 21, 2011 at 8:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

not that this is relevant to this thread, but I want to thank the Sultan of Oman for being a good guy. just wish he had an heir.

- K2K

September 21, 2011 at 8:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is nothing tight about the Obama-Chavez near hug, K2K. It seems like genuine pleasure and warmth (Shudder).

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 9:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Looks like Sarkozy is unhappy with Obama's speech: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/world/middleeast/france-breaks-with-obama-on-palestinian-statehood-issue.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fworld%2Findex.jsonp I have no idea what to make of it.

- noga1

September 21, 2011 at 10:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I love reading MP's columns, although they're a bit long winded at times. Moreover, I especially enjoy reading the vile spat at him from those on the left who can't stomach a critique of Obama's ME policy. Obama's sycophants quake at a harsh critique of the man. Keep it up, Marty. I love your stuff.

- djselzner

September 21, 2011 at 11:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

djselzner, I don't mind honest criticism of Obama, I have criticized him myself on many occasions. In any case, these days Obama is being criticized by the left as well as the right. The left will increase its criticism because of his honest speech at the UN.

- arnon

September 21, 2011 at 11:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think that Chavez greeting is misinterpreted by people, some who have no good intentions. Obama is a good dissembler. Venezuela and the U.S. are two different places, a fact that bears repeating. And Chavez remains president of the one and Obama president of the other, n'est-ce pas? If you don't understand that . . . BTW arnon, I don't understand your continual barking about Noga visiting Palestinian sites and channeling them, or whatever. That's utter nonsense. She's one of the few people around here who actually does a bit of web research instead of just sucking on the stuff that one agrees with anyway. I don't get what your problem is. Maybe you could explain.

- ironyroad

September 22, 2011 at 12:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't think I'm not seeing what I am seeing in that photo, ironyroad. And they look very cozy together. Apparently that dissembling quality kicks in only with certain heads of state ...

- noga1

September 22, 2011 at 6:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga - that was good find of Abbas (now in the 81st month of his 48 month elected term of office) on Youtube! here is 11 minute history of palestinian rejectionism since 1920: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7ByJb7QQ9U&feature=player_embedded so nice to finally have high speed! btw, has anyone seen the new satellite news service that started on Wednesday: Jewish News 1 (JN1)?

- K2K

September 22, 2011 at 9:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K, there is one problem with the 11 minute video. While it's historically accurate it keeps referring to the Arabs in Mandate Palestine as "Palestinians." Before 1948 the people in Mandate Palestine who were known as "Palestinians" were Jews. Most Arabs rejected the label as foreign.They saw themselves as simply Arabs or in some cases as South Syrians. It was in the early 60's that the term Palestinian came into use among Arabs and it was adopted in order to present themselves as the only legitimate inhabitants of the area, viewing Jews as foreigners. It also gave them an identity with which hey hoped the West would understand. They also reduced the conflict to a local issue which it was not. The conflict was and is an Arab Israeli conflict not a local one between "Palestinians" and Jews.

- arnon

September 22, 2011 at 9:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ironyroad “BTW arnon, I don't understand your continual barking about Noga visiting Palestinian sites and channeling them, or whatever. That's utter nonsense. She's one of the few people around here who actually does a bit of web research instead of just sucking on the stuff that one agrees with anyway. I don't get what your problem is. Maybe you could explain.” If call going to antisemitic sites (Arab Muslim and Western of the left and the right) “research” and then presenting their views as belonging to some imaginary majority research, then no I will not waste my time explaining it to you since you wouldn’t understand anyway. I’ll just say that a web site like Memri does a better job presenting the views of extremists in the Arab world. We don’t need an amateur who uses google translations to quote some obscure antisemitic bigot as if they represented anything other than themselves. I also don’t appreciate being quoted as saying that Netanyahu was a “judeo-Nazi.” I find this kind of misrepresentation worthy of mindless bigots and not of a “researcher” interested in truth.

- arnon

September 22, 2011 at 9:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"no I will not waste my time explaining it to you since you wouldn’t understand anyway." But you explained it briefly, arnon, and I understood. However, I was using the term "research" loosely, not meaning scholarly research (although I've no reason to believe Noga and quite a few other folks on these boards can't manage that version either) but rather searching through the forest of electronic expression for the suddenly illuminating, the memorably odd, the accidentally revealing, the casually explanatory -- the way people used to do with print media, in fact. I have had many arguments with Noga about, for example, presenting the notions of one minor academic at a not-very-important California state university as indicative of U.S. academia as a whole, but I didn't move into the surreal by accusing her of channeling his opinions into the TNR discussion thread. And despite all that, he does exist, and I didn't know about that (or want to know, to be honest) until then. But why should I explain anything to you, who understands all? :)

- ironyroad

September 22, 2011 at 11:59am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, I don't know Obama personally, but I simply can not find a shred of rational supposition that convinces me that Chavez, a pudgy mountebank who's gone out of his way to irritate the U.S. over more than one administration, will be taken seriously by the president.

- ironyroad

September 22, 2011 at 12:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Two important articles delineating the dangers of politicizing Israel by Jewish Republicans. "Politicizing Israel" Editorial http://forward.com/articles/143255/ "In Rare Move, AJC Reprimands Anti-Obama Ad" http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/78932/in-rare-move-ajc-reprimands-anti-obama-ad/

- arnon

September 22, 2011 at 12:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I also don’t appreciate being quoted as saying that Netanyahu was a “judeo-Nazi.” If it hurts you to have your views grossly distorted and demonized, you might try to avoid saying the vile things you fling at others. I didn't quote you. Here is what happened: You threw this slimeball: "arnon: "... Noga or the Commentary crowd ... still think Obama is a secret Muslim." And I immediately retorted with a similar slimeball: Noga: "And Arnon believes Netanyahu is a not-so-secret Judeo-Nazi." Tit for tat. Insult for insult. You are not obliged to read my comments, click on the links I provide or peruse the translations I make available. Your explanations border on the slightly demented (so far). This is a message board and I pay over $100 a year for the privilege of posting comments. I will comment on whatever I want in any way I want.

- noga1

September 22, 2011 at 12:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I have had many arguments with Noga about, for example, presenting the notions of one minor academic at a not-very-important California state university as indicative of U.S. academia as a whole," I didn't realize that's what you thought I was doing, ironyroad. Of course I don't think he represents the whole of American academia, what do you take me for? (Don't answer that). But I'm still fascinated by this spectre of a person whose thinking is completely dominated by anger and mindless conjecture being even a part of academia and allowed to teach young students. If he taught Math or biology it would not matter. But political science? The man in incapable of distinguishing between fact and hallucination. But he is very useful as a window into the Arab Street mindset. For example, I learned that some Arabs are not happy with the Palestinian move in the UN because a Palestine state in the UN will cancel the PLO's representation as an organization with an observer status. The PLO represents all Palestinians, including the refugees. If Abbass gets his statehood and the PLO is no longer valid, then the refugees become the problem of Palestine, no more UNRWA needed, etc. This creates a problem for those who see Palestine as supplanting Israel.

- noga1

September 22, 2011 at 12:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

BTW, ironyroad, did you watch Charlie Rose yesterday interviewing Erdogan? Charlie asked rather tough questions that he wouldn't ask any other Muslim leader. I realized he still considers the Turkish PM to be a democratic-minded leader who could be challenged on hard issues. Not for long now, I suspect.

- noga1

September 22, 2011 at 12:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga1 "If it hurts you to have your views grossly distorted and demonized, you might try to avoid saying the vile things you fling at others. I didn't quote you. Here is what happened:" I never distorted your views nor did I pretend to quote when I didn't. You are vile, noga.

- arnon

September 22, 2011 at 1:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes I did, and I agree that CR's whole approach was different from the kind of neutral distance thing he does with e.g. Achmadinejad. My reaction was that Erdogan is a kind of punchy Franz-Josef Strauss-type figure who smugly feels himself to be in a pretty good position at the moment, especially given the positive economic numbers for Turkey and the sense of having finally clipped the wings of the secular upper middle class and the military. He's liked by voters, folks are lining up to get Turkey's attention now, and he has economic growth at his back. I'd look smug.

- ironyroad

September 22, 2011 at 1:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Time for a reminder: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmffgIqlAYA

- noga1

September 22, 2011 at 2:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So much for the two-state solution: http://blog.camera.org/archives/2011/09/post_76.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+kramerlinks+%28Linkage+by+Martin+Kramer%29 "Palestinian ambassador to Lebanon Abdullah Abdullah There was a time when Palestinian leaders sought to conceal their goal of overrunning the Jewish state in misleading commentary for Western audiences that implied a willingness to accept coexistence with a sovereign Israel. Now, evidently, times have changed and blunt statements are deemed safe to make. A remarkable interview in Lebanon's Daily Star (September 15, 2011) illustrates the shift. According to Abdullah Abdullah, Palestinian ambassador to Lebanon, Palestinians would not all become automatic citizens of any future Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. The story reports: "This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens. Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would "absolutely not" be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.” Abdullah's willingness to leave Palestinians stateless in camps even in territory under Palestinian authority is spelled out further for anyone who's missed the point: The right of return that Abdullah says is to be negotiated would not only apply to those Palestinians whose origins are within the 1967 borders of the state, he adds. “The state is the 1967 borders, but the refugees are not only from the 1967 borders. The refugees are from all over Palestine. When we have a state accepted as a member of the United Nations, this is not the end of the conflict. This is not a solution to the conflict. This is only a new framework that will change the rules of the game.”

- noga1

September 22, 2011 at 2:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I meant more in his general style, rather than distinctive policies. However, I'm pretty sure that Erdogan believes, rightly or wrongly, that he has international law on his side. There's nothing like the paranoid evasiveness or defensive bluster that one gets from Achmadinejad with Erdogan.

- ironyroad

September 22, 2011 at 2:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't know, malahat, I'm not him. A half-educated guess: his position would be that Turkey hasn't attacked anyone yet and it was Turkish citizens who were killed by Israelis on the Gaza ship, and in Cyprus he's protecting ethnic Turks who would otherwise be oppressed by Greek Cypriots. Nobody seemed to care about Cyprus as long as Turkey was on our side in NATO. But more to the point, why has this whole Palestinian issue succeeded in drawing attention away from my P.G. Wodehouse pastiche, which is now lost somewhere at the end of p. 1 of this thread?

- ironyroad

September 22, 2011 at 5:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Turks however, make up less than 80 per cent of Turkey's and 25 per cent of Iran's populations. Kurds are the fourth largest ethnic group in the Middle East and in 1990, 27 million lived in a mountainous region that spreads into Turkey (14 million), Iran (7 million), Iraq (5 million) and Syria (1 million). The proportion of Turks in Turkey is declining because the Kurds in that country have higher birth rates. Thus, at 2050 about 44.4 per cent of Turkey's population will be Kurds. The shifting shares among ethnic groups (Kurds and others) in the Middle East, are expected to have important, social, economic and political implications." Could Erdogan be singing Turkey's swan song?

- arnon

September 22, 2011 at 6:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.demokritos.org/D-ABSTRA.htm the link to the above article:

- arnon

September 22, 2011 at 6:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malahat, thanks -- glad you liked it! Noga -- true, I wasn't quite thinking clearly when I made that remark above about our CSU Stanislaus friend -- you weren't impugning academics in general, of course. However, what I really meant to say is that I still believe that it's very possible he doesn't do the Ragin' Arab thing in his normal classes at CSUS. In the U.S. professors, even tenured ones, are reviewed for their teaching and, while seniority protects one a little, students can be very clear and assertive in the evaluations, especially if they think they are being forced into accepting particular opinions in order to please the instructor. I would not be surprised if he has developed a neutral approach (or an ostensibly neutral one, at least) for teaching.

- ironyroad

September 22, 2011 at 7:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga: $100? I pay $29.99 for electronic subscription to TNR, mostly so I can read what I want and comment freely online. Maybe they charge more outside the US. just watched/listened to Erdogan at UN on PBS - not too many in the audience. Before the English translator kicked in, seemed to me that Erdogan has real presence, almost accounting for his political success? PBS then did add-on about Cyprus because EU Cyprus started drilling for offshore gas today with Israel, so Erdogan jumped in to say occupied Turkish Cyprus will start drilling with Turkey, which will provide military protection. hmmm, I wonder if Turkey is really after the gas fields offshore Gaza? is it possible Erdogan wants Hamas to expand to Turkey? I doubt it. and, irony, while I do not have the citations handy, the 'illegal under international law' Turkish occupation of part of Cyprus since 1974 has been a major issue in the decades long EU application. Maybe the US never mentions it, but the Europeans sure do. from today's conference call between Obama and 900 reform rabbis in America: "...Asked about the instability in Egypt and what the U.S. can do to ensure Israel's safety, Obama indicated that a re-ignition of the peace process could cool down the region. "The most important thing we can do to stabilize the strategic situation for Israel is if we can actually resolve the Palestinian-Israeli crisis because that's what feeds so much of the tumult in Egypt," Obama said. "That's what I think has created the deep tension between Turkey and Israel and Turkey has historically been a friend and ally of Israel's. That's why we think direct negotiations are so critical." The president added that "the U.S. relationship with Egypt is centered on their maintaining strong communications and maintaining the peace arrangement with Israel, and they've gotten the message." ..." http://washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?SectionID=57&SubSectionID=76&ArticleID=15762&TM=58003.11 arnon - yes, point taken about use of the term palestinians. However, I did not produce that 11 minute video, and always allow for a bit of editorial license in keeping a narrative clear.

- K2K

September 22, 2011 at 7:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I would not be surprised if he has developed a neutral approach (or an ostensibly neutral one, at least) for teaching." I would.

- noga1

September 22, 2011 at 7:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://pajamasmedia.com/spengler/2011/09/18/erdogan-has-good-reason-to-be-crazy/?singlepage=true [sorry to leave irony dangling on page 3, but this is a worthy addendum to Peretz's jazz-riff on Turkey] "...Now that Turkey has threatened Europe with a “freeze in relations” if Cyprus (as planned) assumes the presidency of the European Union in 2012, it must seem to Erdogan that everyone is driving in the wrong direction. Earlier this month Turkey declared “null and void” the United Nations’ Palmer Commission report, which supported Israel’s right to enforce a blockade against Gaza. That was a minor gaffe, because United Nations dicta have the authority of revelation to the liberal media, except, of course, when they support Israel. It’s one thing for Turkey to freeze relations with Israel — we take it for granted these days that everybody hates Israel — but the Europeans? Everybody likes the Europeans, who have replaced their defense ministries with an answering machine that says, “We surrender.” And over Cyprus? Even Russia, Turkey’s key trading partner and the host for millions of Turkish guest workers, is aghast at Erdogan’s tantrum. Russia has strong ties to Cyprus. ..."

- K2K

September 22, 2011 at 8:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That joke about the answering machine was front page news in Denmark in the 1980s. It was a genuine proposal from a libertarian member of parliament on the grounds that the military was too expensive and in any case couldn't defend the country if there was really a Soviet attack. I think that in some of these cases the recorded message idea wasn't so much a wave of European pacifism but rather the recognition that an unofficial resistance movement would be the only thing that offered any hope in the case of an invasion. The regular military in a tiny country had no chance.

- ironyroad

September 22, 2011 at 11:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Somebody to hate": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jW4_4jFpn4I

- noga1

September 23, 2011 at 6:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-22-2011/west-bank-story http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-22-2011/west-bank-story---challahfax-vs--halalifax two separate videos- part 2 (challahfax vs halalifax) is the funniest satire ever on the I-P conflict . listened to Abbas at UNGA, who gave Jerusalem solely a muslim and christian history. malahat: Goldman aka Spengler now also posts his ATimes column at his blog at pajamasmedia - we cited the exact same post, with different excerpts. At pjm, people can comment.

- K2K

September 23, 2011 at 1:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Spengler is a very optimistic author whose analyses are good to read amid the doom-and-gloom scenarios we get from such "lovers" of Israel as Tom Friedman or Roger Cohen.

- noga1

September 23, 2011 at 2:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close