THE SPINE MARCH 14, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
In fact, Israel explicitly told them that it would, and Washington--with some regret, to be sure--accepted the fact.
So why are the Obami having such conniptions? Because they’ll do anything and everything to pacify the Palestinians, and that’s because the president has a special place in his heart for these zealots who aspire neither to democracy nor to social justice but to revenge on historical progress which they bitterly repelled. Like the rest of the Arab peoples for whom Obama seems also to have undeserved and unrequited affection.
As for the Jerusalem expectations of the administration, here’s a short and irreproachable primer from Barry Rubin.
The fact is that the Obama folk are orchestrating this sturm und drang between allies, and one of the (predictable) results is that the Palestinians will become increasingly demanding and recalcitrant. Just wait and see.
An article in Ha’aretz reports on the inflammatory remarks made this morning by David Axelrod, who has absolutely no intellectual authority on the Israel-Palestine question. But he can be counted on to be inflammatory on the subject. After all, that’s his job.
65 comments
Israel, of course, bears no responsibility for their vindictive diplomatic slap to our collective faces. Obama's overflowing love for Arabs, matched only by his hatred for Israel, is justification enough for the Israelis to deliberately humiliate us, their staunchest ally. Right, Marty? And since our foes and other lesser friends have done as much to us in the past, we should all shut up and quit whining about it. Right again, no? On both sides of this conflict, people with your finger-pointing mindset is the reason there's been no peace and may never be one. And my inference from your writings is that it suits you just fine. If you were born a Palestinian, you'd fit in well among the hardliners who distort facts and blame Israel for everything. That's right, Marty. In attitude, the Israeli nut wing is a photocopy of Palestinian nut wing. But take heart, it's all the fault of your new favorite whipping boy, President Obama.
- scrubby
March 15, 2010 at 1:39am
"The apparent purpose of this public display of animosity toward Israel is the extraction of some concession to offer to Israel's Palestinian non-interlocutors. In the purported peace talks that the administration seeks to facilitate with the part of the Palestinian Authority over which Mahhmoud Abbas presides, Abbas's representatives do not deign to meet face to face with Israel. Such obstruction does not elicit condemnation because the administration sympathizes with Abbas's need to keep up appearances with the fans of Hamas who forthrightly pledge the destruction of Israel. "In the part of the Palestinian Authority over which Abbas presides, Abbas's followers held an illuminating ceremony following Vice President Biden's departing flight from Tel Aviv on Thursday. According to the New York Times, dozens of Palestinian students from Abbas's Fatah party gathered in Ramallah to dedicate a public square to the memory of a woman who in 1978 helped carry out the deadliest terrorist attack in Israel's history. The woman and her terrorist crew killed an American photojournalist, hijacked a bus and commandeered another, embarking on a bloody rampage that left 38 Israeli civilians dead, 13 of them children. "The Palestinian Authority deferred the ceremony until Vice President Biden left town, but Abbas's crew has not stinted in the honors for the terrorist woman: 'The Palestinians also named two girls high schools, a computer center, a soccer championship and two summer camps for Ms. Mughrabi in the last two years.'" http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/03/025826.php
- bulbman1066
March 15, 2010 at 2:18am
"The fact is that the Obama folk are orchestrating this sturm und drang between allies, and one of the (predictable) results is that the Palestinians will become increasingly demanding and recalcitrant. Just wait and see." And we know from rather recent history what happens when Palestinians become increasingly demanding and recalcitrant, don't we?
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 7:05am
Marty again has headline problems. And not just his usual verbosity. This post consists of nothing except excuses. Given that Netanyahu is now pushing legal changes to prevent a third recurrence of this type of diplomatic own goal, Marty's blame-America excuse-making is moot. The Israeli government understands that it screwed up here, and it is taking steps to correct the error.
- rhubarbs
March 15, 2010 at 7:32am
A few facts & comments on the Ramat Shlomo mess & the Obamanoids self-righteous indignation. a) Ramat Shlomo is an existing neighborhood in Northern Jerusalem (not eastern Jerusalem as the geographically challenged MSM report it) of about 20,000 or so (given its ultra-orthodox character, the population grows rapidly). It was built mostly during the early to mid-1990's during the Rabin-Peres administration, and finished during the early part of Bibi1. b) As well noted by IsraelMatzav - Carl (I'll leave off his last name), an actual resident of Ramat Shlomo (and an a securities lawyer), the hill is strategically located as it has a commanding view of several major (and minor) roads into Jerusalem. Also, like Gilo, Ramat Shlomo is one of the post-67 neighborhoods of Jerusalem that nearly "everyone" acknowledges will be part Israeli in any peace deal. c) The district planning and zoning committee that issued the tentative approval for 1,600 more housing units in the neighborhood, is a minor low-level committee buried within the Interior Ministry and meets weekly to review and pass on all sorts of building & zoning requests. Given that the committee meets weekly and issues rulings weekly or bi-weekly, many of its rulings have occurred in the past during state or semi-state visits by all kinds of officials & visitors, USA & otherwise. This is the ONLY time that that the USA chose to explode it into a "crisis". d) When Bibi agreed to the the partial, TEMPORARY building freeze in the disputed territories, he made it eminently clear that it did not include any part of Jerusalem over which Israel declared sovereignty back in 1980 (+/-). Bibi's building policy in Jerusalem is no different than that of any of the preceding governments. Indeed even the old lefties in the Labor party opposes a building freeze in eastern (or northern or southern) Jerusalem (here). e) Would it have been wiser, more polite for said committee to not issue any decisions regarding post-1967 Jerusalem? Yes, but only because the Obamanaughts are looking to "get" Bibi, perhaps (in their fantasies) bring down his government )as the Clintonians (see Rahm Emanuel's biog) succeeded in doing in 1998) and / or extract more concessions from Bibi. Keep in mind the axiom governing all Obamanoid policy -- "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste". And the implicit corollary - if a crisis is lacking, use whatever you can to manufacture one so that it can be used. f) For 15 months Abu Mazen and the Palestinians refused to negotiate with Israel and nary a peep from the Divine Mr. O. Netanyahu makes some unprecedented concessions (building freeze in Judea & Samaria) for which he is castigated by Tzipi Livni & Kadima, and even praised (mildly) by Hillary. One bureaucratic fashla and the world is coming to an end. g) If the Obamanaughts are trying to persuade the Israeli voter that electing a center-right government was a mistake (again, like the Clintonians did in 1998) it will likely backfire. No less an authority than Labor Party elder statesman Binyamin (Fuad) Ben-Eliezer notes to his chagrin that the more Obama beats up on Bibi, the more people turn rightwards (here). Israelis have been badly burned by naive promises from ill-informed US presidents. h) Israelis will now trust Obama even less than they don't already trust him or his advisers. Even the jerks and jesters at J Street won't be able to produce a highly manipulated poll (as is their wont) showing how most Israelis agree with their views and Obama's policies. i) Next crisis - the formal dedication of the rebuilt Hurva Synagogue in the Jewish quarter of the old city (first built in 1701, destroyed by Arab creditors about 20 years or so later, rebuilt in the mid-19th century (after the Jews were forced to pay off the debt from the early 18th Century) and destroyed by the Jordanian Arab Legion (under British command) in 1949 to symbolize more than anything else the end of a Jewish presence in the old city of Jerusalem (surprise, we're baaaack)). Islamist groups both in Israel and the P.A., including Fatah bigwigs, are complaining that because the Hurva was rebuilt on its original site, which has a higher elevation than the Temple Mount, the synagogue is a higher than the al-Aksa Mosque and that is a no-no. Also some are accusing Israel of using the Hurva to cover tunneling under al Aqsa which is hundreds of meters away from the Hurva. Some ostensible "progressives" both in and out of Israel, as well as some Arab spokesmen accuse Israel of turning the Israeli-Arab conflict into a "religious war". They err. It was always a religious conflict and has been one for hundreds of years (conservatively). It only the naive and ignorant fools (the editorial board of the Boston Globe is a good example) who, believing what the Palestinian leadership says in English, and ignoring what they repeatedly say in Arabic, spoke of the conflict as one over borders and territory and that Arafat, Abu Mazen & the PLO were "secular" (in contrast to Hamas) and could be reasoned with or made a peace offer they couldn't refuse. Nonsense. Pure nonsense. Hershel Ginsburg Jerusalem / Efrata
- ginzy
March 15, 2010 at 10:04am
"So why are the Obami having such conniptions? Because they’ll do anything and everything to pacify the Palestinians" Leave it to Marty to make the Palestinians sound like the ones holding all the trump cards in matters related to American positions on Palestine. This is risible nonsense. The Palestinians may pursue their goals cruelly and stupidly, which may be reason enough to condemn them, but cruel and stupid or not, relative to Israel, Palestinians are nearly powerless both on the ground, and in the inner circles of American policy. Israel pretty much controls its own destiny in both places (which makes its slap over settlements a flap, rather than a national catastrophe), the Palestinians in neither.
- IowaBeauty
March 15, 2010 at 11:03am
"Palestinians are nearly powerless both on the ground, and in the inner circles of American policy. " "inner circles"?? That sounds scary. If Palestinians were as powerless as you would have them be, they would have accepted long ago the state that Israel agreed to offer them, via Ehud Barak, President Clinton, Ehud Olmert. When Ben Gurion agreed to the Partitioning of Palestine which left for the Jewish state only a fraction of what had originally been promised and pledged and mandated by the League of Nations, he said he would agree to a state the size of a handkerchief if it meant independence, a homeland, and a safe haven for persecuted Jews. Clearly the Palestinians are not at all powerless or friendless if they can afford to reject, again and again, what they claim they want. Let's not forget who the Palestinians are: "Article 1. Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the greater Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation. " "an indivisible part of the greater Arab homeland", that is, they are an integral part of the Arab middle East in which Arabs are in control of 99.99% of the territory, including nearly 50% of the world's oil reserves. That means that unlike the image you wish to project here, Palestinians have very powerful friends in the world and are holding much better cards than Israelis do (Israelis who make up about 50% of the entire Jewish population in the world which is 12-13 Millions all in all). Of course none of these demographics and records and historical facts matter when you consider that Jews have a way of infiltrating "inner circles" and bullying US presidents into taking on policies that are so clearly against American morality to say nothing of interests.
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 11:52am
Ginzy. What utterly simplistic and common things to say. They just so happen to be very, very true. One has to know where to start before entertaining the idea of a finish. I'd leave you all with further pearls but must needs accomplish a few necessary things in the real world....
- jacko
March 15, 2010 at 12:03pm
The return of Obama as Gd or at least the son of Gd -- http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/weekinreview/15baker.html?partner=rss&emc=rss Note the cross and the halo. hg
- ginzy
March 15, 2010 at 12:10pm
noga: Paranoia becomes you, I guess, but logic obviously escapes you. "Clearly the Palestinians are not at all powerless or friendless if they can afford to reject, again and again, what they claim they want." Or, they are just dumb about their real prospects - which I stipulated as a likely the case in my post. Claiming that their rejection of accomodations in the past proves they are powerful is bizarre at best. If they had the power to get what they want, they would reject accommodations, and then proceed to get better. In fact their fortunes run down hill (what Arafat rejected during the Clinton intervention was less than what they could have gotten 30 years earlier, and more than their likely to get today). Perhaps, deep time is on their side, although the rising success and power of Israel hardly suggests even that. History is replete with devotion to unrealistic remedies and lost causes. The non-too-realistic devotion of Palestinians to their favorite solutions around Jerusalem and right-of-return, and details of a border with Israel join a long company. "That means that unlike the image you wish to project here, Palestinians have very powerful friends in the world and are holding much better cards than Israelis do" Can you name those friends, and how, specifically, they have been willing in the last 3 decades to act decisively in the interests of the Palestinians? Terrorism is not a tool of the powerful, and it's pretty much all they've been able to come up with. One assumes that the Israel government understands this, and that this is why they are so keen on making sure no government who genuinely opposes them acquires nuclear weapons, since that would indeed fundamentally change the calculus vis-a-vis the Palestinian's "powerful friends." "Of course none of these demographics and records and historical facts matter when you consider that Jews have a way of infiltrating "inner circles" and bullying US presidents into taking on policies that are so clearly against American morality to say nothing of interests." I find it odd that from my making an argument that vis-a-vis the Palestinians, Israel enjoys a significant advantage in influence in the United States, and in power on the ground, you've jumped to the conclusion that I am suggesting a Jewish conspiracy. Overall, terrorism and sporadic guerrilla warfare, which is about all the Palestinians have been able to bring to bear against Israel in the last 30 years, are not tools of the powerful. Failure to recognize this will preclude understanding the (again, stupid) approach the Palestinians take to their situation.
- IowaBeauty
March 15, 2010 at 12:49pm
My comment, IowaBeauty, was clear enough for those who have eyes to read and a mind to comprehend. All your "questions" are answered in that post. Repeating them with the hope that you might actually exert your grey cells would be as effective as grinding water.
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 1:02pm
Noga1 said: My comment, IowaBeauty, was clear enough for those who have eyes to read and a mind to comprehend. Noga, that was a low blow. You are one of my favorite commenters, but I think you went to the wrong place here. IowaBeauty is making a point that you will do well not to so flippantly dismiss, even if you disagree with her. Don't let your passion get in the way of reason.
- wkwami
March 15, 2010 at 1:49pm
"Noga, that was a low blow. " "noga: Paranoia becomes you, I guess, but logic obviously escapes you." One low blow deserves another.
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 2:45pm
One of the most persistent criticisms of tnr and of Peretz specifically, is that from their perspective, Israel can do no wrong. So, I have to say that I have been very curious to read how Martin Peretz would respond in this situation and sadly, he has outdone himself. Here you have a situation where Israel used the Vice Presidential visit to publicly embarrass the US and VP Biden, and throw yet another monkey wrench into the now all but dead peace process. Given this, Martin H. Peretz yet again finds some way to blame the US and Obama for what is unarguably an Israeli misstep and provocation. Today, even Netanyahu has admitted that the announcement was a mistake but it is significant that Peretz' first, last, and only response, even when Israel pokes the eye of his own country the United States of America, is move blame away from Israel and onto whomever. Sad but expected.
- MrCookie1
March 15, 2010 at 2:50pm
"even when Israel pokes the eye of his own country the United States of America" Clearly it is unAmerican for any journalist to deviate from Obama's party line. Marty ought to take cookie's not so subtle warning to heart. Under today's US CEO's policies, there is no telling how things may evolve. BTW, cookie, read ginzy's post about the history of this non-existent poke. Do you think it is safe to argue, on a day when Obama so obviously relishes this imaginary insult to the hilt, to venture to say that there was no poke and no insult, just a dogged attempt to find a cause for grievance and if it couldn't be found, to contrive one? I wonder if Biden knew he was being set up to act as the injured party in this great drama? The only plausible reason for this grand opera that I would accept is some Machievelian machination on the part of Obama to create this spectacle of a false crisis in order to be able to go to the Palestinians and demand that they exert themselves to lift a finger in response to whatever it is Obama expects to extract from the Israelis. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1156467.html
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 3:12pm
Noga, so you don't anything wrong at all with Israel's timing of the announcement? Do you realize how this is playing around the world? This narrative is much bigger than just the impact on US/Israel relationship.
- wkwami
March 15, 2010 at 3:37pm
Ken, the second act of this mess, though, advances the theme of American over reaction after its understandable initial critical reaction. Lots of that theme to be seen in the blogosphere. I say that as one critical of Peretz's take on the matter right from the beginning.
- basman
March 15, 2010 at 3:59pm
Noga: If my introduction was a bit rough, it was at least targeted. "Paranoia" referred to your jump to the conclusion (which I did not state, or even hint at) that I was alluding to some sort of Jewish conspiracy in Washington. I was not. That you would conclude with no evidence (beyond the utterly common term "inner circle") that I was suggests a bit of prejudgment at best. Lack of logic is, again, if a bit harsh, very specifically related to what I had to say: it simply makes no sense to say that a group failing in nearly every respect in achieving their goals, with respect to either US policy or their nationalist program, is far more powerful than their opponent who in fact is succeeding in both regimes. Pointing out that they were confident enough in their future to reject the Clinton brokered solution proves nothing about the actual strength of their position, although it may yield some interesting insights into their perception of that strength. Frankly, Palestinian intransigence may well be a symptom in its own right of their fundamental powerlessness (and a big reason for Arafat's rejection of the Clinton brokered compromise). So long as they do not settle, they can hold out their unlikely forlorn hope for right-of-return and sovereignty over all the lands they believe to be theirs. Once they sign a final treaty, all of that is gone. Meanwhile, I see no answers to my questions in your first post or your response. Tell me again, why would a polity with these fundamental strengths you and Marty perceive be continually such a failure in getting what they claim to want? Do you honest believe they are closer today than 20 years ago to anything other than a very constrained (from the standpoint of their ambitions) solution?
- IowaBeauty
March 15, 2010 at 4:01pm
"Do you realize how this is playing around the world? This narrative is much bigger than just the impact on US/Israel relationship." If you mean by "The world" what I understand from it, then let me just state that nothing this "world" believes or does or does not do comes as a surprise. It is the grandchild of the world that was there in 1939 and 1945. And if this "narrative" is doing the rounds in this "world" that is, serves as fuel for the demonization of Israel, then I have to wonder what Obama is thinking about when he plays his manufactured "insult" on this grand scale? How come he is an accomplice in this kind of activities?
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 4:13pm
"Tell me again, why would a polity with these fundamental strengths you and Marty perceive be continually such a failure in getting what they claim to want?" Are they a failure? They want the destruction of Israel and going back to Haifa. They tried, with the help of their Arab brothers to achieve this aim a few times, and failed, thanks to Israel's strength and resolve. We are now entering a new era, in which Iran is set to become dominant in the region and Obama is trying to disengage from Israel. Palestinians are not losing. They have the support of 400 million Arabs and their oil money, as well as 1 Billion Muslims and who knows how many millions Leftist Europeans. Let me remind it was not too long ago that Abbas was saying: "...in the West Bank we have a good reality… the people are living a normal life.” Would a loser say or think anything like this, would the leader of a suffering polity express himself in this relaxed fashion? http://www.forward.com/articles/107217/ In the meantime, just so that no one will be under any illusion as to where this is going, there is this: http://blog.z-word.com/2010/03/egypts-national-airline-wipes-israel-off-the-map/ They are not delusional, those Egyptians. They understood Obama's Cairo speech for what it was, given at the location where it was. Arabs know how to read smoke signals, I suppose.
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 4:32pm
noga You simply refuse to acknowledge that this was at best, an ill-timed announcement, at worst, a deliberate provocation. Your deflections and granular level hypotheses simply fly in the face of fact. And, that you and the other Peretz apologists simply cannot address the fact that with some incredible - even for the Spine - reasoning ju-jitsu, Peretz continues to try to find fault in the actions of the US & the Obama administration, rather than those of Israel current bellicose ruling coalition is more telling than anything. What this suggests, at least to anyone who is willing to address facts and not personally imagined figments, is that this blog and its denizens are unable to objectively address anything dealing with Israel and Israeli actions, even with the United States.
- MrCookie1
March 15, 2010 at 5:59pm
"You simply refuse to acknowledge that this was at best, an ill-timed announcement, at worst, a deliberate provocation. " How do you that either possibility is right? The fact that you attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity or incompetence tells me more about your own imagined figments. One of the greatest persuasive arguments I read about Obama came from Cass Sunstein who wrote about the way presidential candidates interact with their opponents. His points can easily extend to any discussion: "The antonym of respect is disdain or (better) contempt; the antonym of charity is selfishness or (better) stinginess.... Politicians who show charity as well as respect--Senator Obama is a rare example--tend to put opposing arguments in the best possible form, to praise the motivations of those who offer such arguments, and to seek proposals that specifically accept the defining commitments of all sides." In the recent quarrel with Israel Obama has proved to be every bit as gentlemanly and decent in disagreement as Susntein described him. And I have to say, his impeccable ethics are immaculately copied by his advocates, Mr. Cookie is a fine example.
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 6:23pm
During his visit to Ramallah, Biden asked Abu Mazen to cancel the P.A. plans to name a square in Ramallah after the terrorist (how gauche of me to use that term) responsible for attacking a bus, killing a bunch of Israelis and an American. Reportedly Abu Mazen agreed. However the next day, while Biden was speaking at T.A.U., the Pals went ahead with the naming despite their promises to Biden. So did you hear a peep about this "affront" from the Obamanaughts? A mild protest? A question? A "gee whiz, couldn't you have waited a week or two"? Memo to the elderly Jews in Florida who were heavily lobbied, even extorted, by their Obamanoid grandchildren to vote for the Divine Mr. O.: Despite what your darling grandchildren promised, Obama ain't pro-Israel and is not "good for Israel" by any stretch. You were had. Bait and switch par excellence. Demand your money back. hg
- ginzy
March 15, 2010 at 6:35pm
noga Again, you simply refuse to address the main issues: One, Peretz reflexively defends Israeli actions, even when Israel is wrong. Two, your angels-on-the-head-of-pin excuse for this blatant and ill-timed announcement - stupidity and/or incompetence - is just too far fetched to be seriously entertained. That somehow, somewhere, some incompetent and/or stupid Israeli functionary just happened to let this slip....when Vice President Biden is in the nation, either suggests that you have an unusual sense of humor or you just insist, like a stubborn five year old, on defending your indefensible point.
- MrCookie1
March 15, 2010 at 6:52pm
Cookie, Your conspiratorial obsession is quite impressive. As I noted in my admittedly massive missive, this committee meets weekly and issues rulings biweekly. Given that most of the available land for construction in Jerusalem is in the post-1967 neighborhoods, most of the new construction and zoning decisions per force relate to areas over the 49-67 cease fire lines. The committee has issued decisions many many times over the years during all kinds of visits of foreign dignitaries, big and small. This has been going on for 40 years. The Netanyahu gov't is doing nothing different than Olmert, Sharon, Barak (Ehud), Bibi1, Rabin-Peres, Shamir-Peres, Shamir, Begin, Rabin1, Golda, Eshkol gov'ts have done. Same policy, same processes. Would it have been better for someone at a senior level to make sure that zoning committees don't do anything during Biden's visit? Yes, because said senior level person should have been aware that the Obamanoids would exploit and blow out of any proportion any screwup in order to stick it to the Israelis and extract unwarranted concessions. By contrast, note (as I noted above) the Obamanoids silence on the Pals naming a square in Ramallah after a terrorist who killed many Israelis and an American. Pure hypocrisy. In other words, in the finest tradition of Chicago (I lived there for 8 years) political hacks and greaseballs, when you don't have a crisis on hand that would be a terrible thing to waste, be sure to use whatever opportunity comes your way to manufacture one. And both Axelrod & Emmanuel (although the latter has been strangely silent on this one) nothing if not Chicago pols. And that is where Obama got his political education. hg
- ginzy
March 15, 2010 at 7:35pm
Ginzy, I enjoyed your post, especially your tales of your Chicago sojourn. Still, given the content of your post, you too appear to know a thing or two about conspiratorial obsessions. Still, you and noga insist that this was a mere slip up, on some lower functionary level. I suggest that you are either being disingenuous or naive. Here we have a meeting of two allies who have disagreements about how to move forward, especially in regards to the settlements, and you honestly believe that the Israeli govt. would be so incredibly sloppy and inattentive that this little cherry bomb would explode right in the middle of a state visit and that it was all just the plodding march forward of some zoning committee? C'mon, ginzey, surely that seems very unlikely and you don't have to be a raving conspiracy monger to be skeptical.
- MrCookie1
March 15, 2010 at 7:48pm
I love banging my head against the wall because it feels so good when I stop doing it.
- noga1
March 15, 2010 at 8:06pm
Listening to Israelis criticize the election of Obama and his supporters after themselves electing a hopeless clod like Netanyahu would be amusing if the whole thing weren't so tragic. All the endless justification based on history, this, that, the other thing. Let us concede that every little morsel of Ginsburg's historical justification is absolutely true. Speaking of halos, Ginsburg might as well be Moses delivering the word of God from Mt. Sinai. Herschel the Prophet. So what? What does it all have to do with the balance of power and interests that will ultimately decide the outcome of the war for Israel? Nothing. Is there no one in the State of Israel with the brains to think about power -- military, diplomatic, economic -- and how it is brought to bear in the world for good and ill? You all may think the Arabs are stupid, vicious, inhuman, whatever you like. But understand this: They have a long-term strategy, based on their own willingness to absorb punishment, and it is working. A key part of that strategy is actually to prevent Israel from disengaging, while doing everything possible to place the onus of responsibility for that on Israel, in the certain knowledge that the world will eventually come to see the dominion of Israel over the Palestinians as being indistinguishable form apartheid. Any rational observer not obsessed with Isreali self-justification should be able to see that happening already. And if the world becomes convinced of this, regardless of whether it is "true," and should impose economic sanctions on Israel, a small country with limited resources, completely dependent on foreign trade, how long do you think it will take to bring Israel to its knees? And what sort of "deal" do you imagine Israel will have to accept to escape hell? This is the future that the sick, fucked-up, wacko, messianic right-wing of Israel assiduously courts. Watching this is akin to watching someone drive straight over a cliff in slow motion. What are you going to do when the pressure becomes unbearable, trot out historical analogies as if geo-politics were some sort of yeshiva? Is this what Zionism was for? For a bunch of inept religious Jewish nuts to deceive themselves that war, power, politics are all just a heated discussion in some yeshiva? The most urgent geo-political need of Israel, not of the Palestinians, but of Israel, is to disentangle itself from dominion over the Palestinians before it is too late. Instead of doing what it can to make that a reality, or at the very least trying to manage its diplomacy so that it is perceived as striving mightily in that direction, the idiot Netanyahu shoots his own dick off, with that equally moronic Martin Peretz cheering from the sidelines. That's right, Peretz. You are a moron, just like Bush. And morons like you will be the end of Israel. The United States is large enough and wealthy enough that it may be able to stagger on despite the wounds inflicted upon it by its moron. Israel has no such depth. If it were not for the support of the United States, the war for Israel would end tomorrow, with Israel the loser. In that light, only another moron would make alienating US public opinion its highest priority. You think it is unfair that Netanyahu gets pilloried for the timing of the announcement while the Palestinians get a bye for honoring a terrorist? Again, so what? What does fairness have to do with power? Doesn't this very contrast tell Israel anything about politics and the state of the world that it ought to consider deeply in the interest of its own survival?
- roidubouloi
March 15, 2010 at 8:27pm
- wkwami
March 15, 2010 at 9:09pm
It occurs to me that the extreme cognitive disjunction of our Israeli interlocutors is evidenced by the fact that they consider the symbolism of the Arabs naming a square after a terrorist of tremendous importance. Yet, in virtually the same breath, they consider the symbolism of this announcement during the state visit of the US Vice President, for the specific purpose of moving forward negotiations, albeit indirect negotiations, as being trivial. And, indeed, the naming is but a symbol, the construction of houses on land that is the subject of the dispute is both a symbol and more. The former is the symbolic act of those without power, naming things. The latter is the symbolic act and more of those with power, building with impunity. The reason that these two acts are not generally perceived as equivalent also eludes our TNR Israelis in favor of their own interpretation that the difference in perception is purely hypocrisy and malice. Even so, if they are right and every failure by non-Israelis to perceive the world as Israelis do is purely the result of hypocrisy and malice, what then ought Israel to do? Everything possible to encourage hypocrisy and malice and give them fertile ground?
- roidubouloi
March 15, 2010 at 9:19pm
- wkwami
March 15, 2010 at 9:31pm
- wkwami
March 15, 2010 at 10:58pm
"Whatever you may feel about Obama's policies, please understand that he is loved and greatly admired by a lot of brown and black people around the world (including me)," What a strange irrelevant thing to say! As the man said, what's that got to do with the price of tomatoes? Obama may be all that. I judge him by what he does and says not by the accident of the colour of his skin (I wonder, though; would all those brown and black people around the world have loved and admired him had he happened to look more like his mother? Is this what it comes down to, the bottom line, the colour of the skin?) BTW, imagine a similar statement being declared about a white man! Or a Jewish man? What would you have called such a declaration?
- noga1
March 16, 2010 at 6:51am
As for PR and all that, here is a relevant rejoinder from Amy Isserroff: "We are to believe that bad Israeli "PR" and not unprofessional and unethical journalism is what caused Newsweek, Time and the New York Times to print fabricated stories of Israeli atrocities following the Gaza War, often without asking for Israeli comment, without questioning how the same person could have died three different times in three different ways for example. Bad Israeli PR skills were also responsible for the cartoon of Ariel Sharon eating babies and for the magazine covers that showed Jewish stars in the American flag. Bad Israeli PR skills are responsible, according to Hirsh, for all the straight news stories where Israeli officials and the Israeli government are singled out with the epithets "ultranationlist" and "right wing." These are not used, for example, in describing the progressive and democratic government of Saudi Arabia, and certainly never used to describe that liberal democrat, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or that paragon of tolerance, Hassan Nasrallah, General Secretary of the Hezbullah. They are not right leaning nor are they ultranationalist. Bad Israeli PR skills are what made almost every major media outlet virtually ignore the huge shipment of arms Israel discovered in the Karine A ship captured by Israel. It was almost impossible to drag journalists to Eilat to see the arms display. The recent capture of the Francop, with Iranian arms bound for the Hezbollah, was a remake of the Karine A. It was hardly covered by media, and if it was covered, it was presented as "Israel says the arms originated in Iran" "Israel claims the arms were destined for Hezbollah." always in quotes and in a way ensured to convey total disbelief. Show them one fake victim of a nonexistent Israeli atrocity though, and the press corps will all be there. The headlines will say "Israel Massacred" "Israel killed" with no attribution and no cause for incredulity. Bad Israeli PR skills caused the press to repeat the unfounded libel of the Jenin "massacre" for months on end. Poor Israeli PR skills caused Newsweek and every other media outlet to ignore the Hamas's own video footage that shows them exalting the use of human shields. Mr. Hirsh and his colleagues could not use YouTube either to view the numerous IDF films documenting Hamas use of human shields and showing the kinds of targets the IDF hit and why they hit them." http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000727.html
- noga1
March 16, 2010 at 7:00am
"But take heart, it's all the fault of your new favorite whipping boy, President Obama." Scrubby may not own up to it, but the current PLO instigated riots in Jerusalem are in part the fault of the Obama administration. The Palestinian leaders have always taken advantage of differences between the US and Israel to launch riots and kill Jews. People like scrubby pretend not to see any difference between Jews and rioting Arabs, but it's only pretence in their part. In truth, they would love to scrub out the Jewish State from the world map.
- jdyer
March 16, 2010 at 8:59am
My last contribution on this sorry thread is this: This event has been widely discussed over the past few days. Yet, at tnr, this post has been the only mention of the incident, the only opportunity for tnr readers to weigh in. That says a lot. I thank Peretz for at least putting up this solitary post. Too bad that everything about it, from the lame excuses and misplaced blame for the Israeli misstep and poor behavior, and the divorced from reality comments from the the Spine regulars, was so predictable.
- MrCookie1
March 16, 2010 at 9:01am
Marty has put up at least three posts that discuss this issue. I too noticed the silence on this subject from the other TNR bloggers. Perhaps unlike Marty who is unapologetic in his love for Israel, they are more attentive to the proto-Maccarthyite undertones that characterize some of the comments here.
- noga1
March 16, 2010 at 10:26am
"The Palestinian leaders have always taken advantage of differences between the US and Israel to launch riots and kill Jews." Very true, jack. And you can dig back into the archives and read for yourself my posts on such events. "Scrubby may not own up to it, but the current PLO instigated riots in Jerusalem are in part the fault of the Obama administration." Yes, jack, everything bad since the Holocaust could be laid at President Obama's feet. He's to blame for every Arab terror attack. He's also to blame for Israeli misdeeds. He forced their hands. "People like scrubby pretend not to see any difference between Jews and rioting Arabs, but it's only pretence in their part. In truth, they would love to scrub out the Jewish State from the world map." Oh yeah, jack. Scrubbing off the Jewish state alongside with my brother, nephews and niece that currently reside there is the only thing I live for. One can't criticize, or even disagree with, Israel without bearing malice, of course. And you, the fulminating and obscene-minded jackass, is our resident arbiter on good and bad Jews. You, marty and a few others on this site are a mirror image of the Hamas inner circle. You blabbering, foul-mouthed nincompoop.
- scrubby
March 16, 2010 at 10:32am
Chait had a post that was completely ignored by most of the bloggers above.
- roidubouloi
March 16, 2010 at 11:34am
"Yes, jack, everything bad since the Holocaust could be laid at President Obama's feet. He's to blame for every Arab terror attack. He's also to blame for Israeli misdeeds. He forced their hands." Don't be a bigger ass than you already are, scrubby. I never said any thing of the kind. I have also said that it was the Israeli PM's weakness that led to the crisis in the first place. Still, Obama is not faultless. He knows what we are up against in the Middle East. He knows that if a heavy weight player like the US even hints at criticism of an ally (no matter how deserved) that he may destroy the balance of power in the region. Didn't we learn anything from the Iranian revolution, not to mention events before than in Asia and elsewhere? Just as the snafu over the building announcement is the fault of Netanyahu’s government so to the present day rioting in Jerusalem is the fault of the Obama administration. What is sickening about this latest mishandling of foreign policy is that the Obama people are now making nice to Netanyahu which will allow the PM not to make any much needed changes in the government. Some posters above had hoped that the PM would be able to get rid of the Shas party, a wish that I share, well at this point I doubt he will do it since it will making look even weaker than he is.
- jdyer
March 16, 2010 at 2:45pm
roidubouloi "Chait had a post that was completely ignored by most of the bloggers above." I am not online 24/7, and I don't get to read everything. Do you have a link to that post?
- jdyer
March 16, 2010 at 2:46pm
1. http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/netanyahus-blunder 2. Totally uncalled for by any measure of civil discourse: "People like scrubby pretend not to see any difference between Jews and rioting Arabs, but it's only pretence in their part. In truth, they would love to scrub out the Jewish State from the world map."
- basman
March 16, 2010 at 3:50pm
Chait's post "No, the settlements aren't "the" key obstacle to peace. But they are an obstacle to peace." This goes without saying. It's also true that Netanyahu hasn't stopped construction in Arab East Jerusalem. However, as I said above, the manner in which the Obama administration dealt with this issue made it much worse.
- jdyer
March 16, 2010 at 4:46pm
Thanks, Itzik. Sometimes jack's mind get's overheated and he'd launch very over-the-top and needless attacks. Perhaps one day he'll learn to push back the rage. But for now he needs to wash out his mouth (or typing fingers) with soap. He must think I'm george or something.....
- scrubby
March 16, 2010 at 9:33pm
get's? no, "gets". Me writing no very good.
- scrubby
March 16, 2010 at 9:47pm
scrubby "He must think I'm george or something....." No, I think you are scrubby. That is something, isn't it?
- jdyer
March 16, 2010 at 10:16pm
- wkwami
March 16, 2010 at 11:06pm
"(unless you're implying there is something illegitimate about the accomplishment for which he is loved and admired)? " Here is what you said: "Whatever you may feel about Obama's policies, please understand that he is loved and greatly admired by a lot of brown and black people around the world (including me)," And you don't think there would be something iffy about saying this: Whatever you may feel about Obama's policies, please understand that he is loved and greatly admired by a lot of white people around the world (including me) Or Whatever his policies, please understand that this leader is loved and greatly admired by a lot of Jews around the world ??? Are you for real? We certainly live in a highly bigoted and hypocritical world which is why I wouldn't be parading these prejudices so openly and sanctimoniously as if they had any merit whatsoever.
- noga1
March 16, 2010 at 11:37pm
Arguments about the settlements seem to fall into a predictable dichotomy. The left and Palestinian sympathizers insist they are an obstacle to peace. The right and Israeli nationalists insist that they are not an obstacle to peace as their status is part of what is to be determined by a settlement and yielding anything in advance of the settlement merely concedes Israel's bargaining position. This argument is quite beside the real point which is that the settlements are a strategic liability for Israel, and conversely a strategic asset for Arab maximalists and extremists, because they impair Israel's ability to maintain security control of the West Bank indefinitely, that is as long as it takes for security without the IDF to be established, potentially a rather long time regardless of the political status. The settlements cannot be justified on the basis of security. Nor can Israel regularize the status of all inhabitants of the territory by according them equal political rights pending settlement because this would effectively be a one-state solution, demographically fatal to Israel. In consequence, they must remain a part of a regime of unequal political status that bears too close a resemblance to apartheid. As time passes, the world will inevitably lose sight of the differnces undermining Israel's legitimacy and steadily increasing its isolation, an unsustainable position, a selfIinflicted wound.
- roidubouloi
March 17, 2010 at 6:38am
roidubouloi " This argument is quite beside the real point which is that the settlements are a strategic liability for Israel, and conversely a strategic asset for Arab maximalists and extremists, because they impair Israel's ability to maintain security control of the West Bank indefinitely, that is as long as it takes for security without the IDF to be established, potentially a rather long time regardless of the political status. The settlements cannot be justified on the basis of security. Nor can Israel regularize the status of all inhabitants of the territory by according them equal political rights pending settlement because this would effectively be a one-state solution, demographically fatal to Israel." I have been arguing the for years, now, that most (not all) the settlemts were and are a waste of Israel's resources and lives. How much Israeli money and manpower was invested in the Gaza settlements, and where are they now? Melted away like last month's snows.
- jdyer
March 17, 2010 at 12:42pm
A two state solution is clearly best for Israel. It would be best for the Palestinians as well. If only the Palestinians would agree to it and give up their dream of destroying the state of Israel. If, as appears possible, democracy takes hold in Iraq then maybe the benign bug will spread and the Palestinians will see beyond ethnic hatred and start taking a more enlightened and less self-destructive attitude.
- bulbman1066
March 17, 2010 at 1:06pm
"Whatever his policies, please understand that this leader is loved and greatly admired by a lot of Jews around the world" Furthermore, you could say black and brown people loved Clinton--he was an honorary "brother." I fail to see why that's weird. But then, you're all death by a thousand paper cuts. You fixate on some minor point, refusing to see the bigger picture, as a way of responding. Because you know what? Back in the fifties and sixties, every boy's encyclopedia of important Jews included Sandy Koufax. Would this seem weird to you? The pride that someone who looks like you/prays like you/whatever would incite. Uh, that would be George Bush. Why do you think neo-con Jews loved him so much? And I don't recall Marty ever bashing Bush the way he does Obama. Sure, a couple of asides as to Bush being dumb, but not much else. I'm sure any of you could link to Marty's negative Bush quotes, but there's no way he was as vehement in his disapproval.
- MOLLYSIMON
March 17, 2010 at 8:57pm
Oops: Here's a corrected version of my last post: "Whatever his policies, please understand that this leader is loved and greatly admired by a lot of Jews around the world" Uh, that would be George Bush. Why do you think neo-con Jews loved him so much? And I don't recall Marty ever bashing Bush the way he does Obama. Sure, a couple of asides as to Bush being dumb, but not much else. I'm sure any of you could link to Marty's negative Bush quotes, but there's no way he was as vehement in his disapproval. Furthermore, you could say black and brown people loved Clinton--he was an honorary "brother." I fail to see why that's weird. But then, you're all death by a thousand paper cuts. You fixate on some minor point, refusing to see the bigger picture, as a way of responding. And by the way, you know what? Back in the fifties and sixties, every boy's encyclopedia of important Jews included Sandy Koufax. Would this seem weird to you? The pride that someone who looks like you/prays like you/whatever would incite?
- MOLLYSIMON
March 17, 2010 at 8:59pm
I'm sure there is a point somewhere in the last two comments... Maybe this: "you're all death by a thousand paper cuts." ??? "every boy's encyclopedia of important Jews " I seem to recall vaguely that this used to be Mordechai Richler's favourite bedtime reading.
- noga1
March 18, 2010 at 9:06am
There you go, Noga--literal minded as always (it's that damn autism spectrum. Seriously, I don't know why your mother never sent you to a speech therapist). There is no one encyclopedia of important Jews--it's a joke about all such books that have been reprinted over the years and been given as Bar Mitzva presents. You're obviously suffering from literalism (a common spectrum issue) if you can't see that what I'm talking about is racial pride. We all indulge. Of course, in your inability to see from other people's perspective (empathy is one of the main deficits of those in the spectrum) you can't imagine that Africans and blacks from all over the world feel such pride in Obama.
- MOLLYSIMON
March 18, 2010 at 12:04pm
You seem to be exceptionally knowledgeable about autism and such. I hope this knowledge does not come from personal experience either as a sufferer or related to one who suffers or a professional caregiver to autistic individuals. I find your utilizing such a tragic condition to insult other people is beyond contemptible, especially coming from someone who claims to know something about sympathy and empathy. It is also unsurprising that you know nothing about Richler or his preferred bedtime reading. Your utter ignorance is a garnish on the irony of the allusion. You may rest assured, though, that I do not find Jews like you personally embarrassing at all. Jews, like any other people, have a right to be as stupid, smug and moronic as you.
- noga1
March 18, 2010 at 2:13pm
Hmm, moronic and smug. Now that's much more clever than Asperger's. But you're right, the taunting has to go. I'd rather argue with you on the points. And the Aspie charge has allowed you to skip over my point about ethnic pride. I really don't know about Mordecai Richler's favorite bedtime reading. But the point I was making is that we all indulge in ethnic pride. If you didn't pick up on the joke, lame as it is, I'll explain. The old cliche has it that upon his Bar Mitzvah, many Jewish American boys would be given a plethora of engraved Cross gold pens and something along the lines of "the greatest Jews ever." That's not the title, mind you, it's a parody of lots of titles. I didn't work very hard on it. So if you didn't laugh, that's cool.
- MOLLYSIMON
March 18, 2010 at 3:09pm
"I didn't work very hard on it." I get the impression that you don't work hard on anything. Except insults. And even with that you manage to disgust rather than to ridicule, because, as one famous Jew once said: petulance is no sarcasm, and insolence is not invective
- noga1
March 18, 2010 at 3:24pm
Total digression. ...I seem to recall vaguely that this used to be Mordechai Richler's favourite bedtime reading.... I did my MA thesis--125 pages of digestible prose--on his novels too many years ago, just after he had finished St. Urbain's Horseman. And I'm not getting any younger, so far as I know. He's never mentioned anywhere around here so I couldn't pass up the opportunity say so when his named popped up. Okay, everyone can get back to insulting each other. or whatever.
- basman
March 18, 2010 at 5:42pm
What was your thesis about Basman?
- noga1
March 18, 2010 at 7:39pm
There you go again, Noga, refusing to address the point. That's the way you roll, I guess. Accuse everyone who doesn't agree with you of being an anti-Semite, add lots of insults, and then accuse others of insulting you. And all the while, avoiding the topic at hand.
- MOLLYSIMON
March 18, 2010 at 7:57pm
It was an ongoing thematic interpretation of his novels tied to an analysis of how his formal choices-realism, satire, comic, black humour, the picaresque and so on-- within the form of the novels informed his themes. I called it "Form As World". Thanks for asking. I like remembering it.
- basman
March 18, 2010 at 9:45pm
Noga1, I admire your passion, but I think sometimes that passion gets in the way of reason.
Why would there be anything iffy about admiring a man who ran for, and became the first black president of the US? That is the accomplishment and for which he is admired and beloved. He may end up as a failed president, and one may agree or disagree with his politics and policies, but it still doesn't negate what he accomplished when he won the election. Unless of course, you believe his presidency is somehow illegitimate. And your point being??? If this Jewish leader had accomplished a major feat of particular significance to Jews, then he'd be deserving of the love and admiration of Jews. I am just shocked, shocked to learn we live in a highly bigoted and hypocritical world. To paraphrase you, Noga1, the fact that you attribute to skin color that which can be adequately explained by Obama's accomplishment of winning the presidency tells me more about your own biases. And that makes you even more guilty of "parading prejudices openly and sanctimoniously as if they have any merit whatsoever". There are no accidents of skin color. Someone purposefully created racial categories and also determined our place in it. To paraphrase Malcolm X, we didn't land on a racial category, a racial category landed on us. May I remind you that if Obama had been born 200 years ago under the same circumstances, it wouldn't matter whether he looked more like his mother (he could be light skinned, dark skinned, lily white like, or as black as coal), it wouldn’t make a dime of a difference, as he'd still be denied many basic rights and opportunities, NOT because of the color of his skin, but because of the racial category imposed on him. As long as you don't understand that, the black and brown admiration for Obama will continue to baffle, and be misintepreted by you.- wkwami
March 19, 2010 at 9:17am
Pardon the grammatical and spelling mistakes... ugh. I was in a hurry, didn't proof read.
- wkwami
March 19, 2010 at 9:28am
"...s that passion gets in the way of reason. " That's rich, coming from someone who saw fit to warn me about criticizing Obama too explicitly: "Whatever you may feel about Obama's policies, please understand that he is loved and greatly admired by a lot of brown and black people around the world (including me)," BTW, I stand by my initial reading that this is completely irrelevant to any assessment of Obama's policies and smacks of reverse bigotry. If a white man were elected and someone would try to ward off his critics by vouching that he is much loved by white people around the world, we would all feel distinctly uneasy about the sentiment that underlies such a statement. Clearly you feel you are not bound by the same standards.
- noga1
March 19, 2010 at 4:00pm