Harry's Place

I agree with Jeffrey Goldberg and Daniel Gordis: Obama is, essentially, Tzipi Livni. Which I find more reassuring than frightening.

Good post. I’ve often wanted to tell the Labour Friends of Palestine, led by settlements-obsessed Martin Linton MP, that there are many blocks to peace and this is only one of them, and a negotiable one at that. Now I have the words.

Happy Birthday, Tel Aviv!

why was my post deleted?

Here, I’ll write it again.

When Obama hands back Texas to the Mexicans, then he can focus on Israel.

Or maybe Israel should do what the Americans did. Slaughter all the Arabs and give the remaining ones a stamp sized piece of land where they can build a casino.

That’s all well and good until of course Obama demands the end of Israeli occupation of Ashkelon, Haifa, Tel Aviv and whatnot. He won’t express it that way but the intention will be fairly clear. “When they came for the trade unionists I did nothing because I wasn’t a trade unionist, etc etc etc.”

“When Obama hands back Texas to the Mexicans, then he can focus on Israel.

Or maybe Israel should do what the Americans did. Slaughter all the Arabs and give the remaining ones a stamp sized piece of land where they can build a casino.”

There is an alternative though J.
He could stop the US sending enourmous amounts of military aid and assistance to Israel.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/07/29/afx3963706.html

I do hope these American handouts become more conditional in the future.

PM Netanyahu can do what he likes of course. I just dont see why American taxpayers should pay for his tanks if he isn’t going to offer anything back.

This is always the trouble with benefit dependency!

the current Israeli government’s rejectionism [it] may be less genocidal than that of Hamas, but given the power imbalance, it is far more threatening to hopes of making a deal

Bonkers territory. That’s like the “Buchenwald … however … Gaza” trope.

But a lot seems to be explained by the writer’s priorities. Eating hummus in Damascus? That’s a serious reason to negotiate with rejectionist Arab regimes, who refuse to make the basic step of even recognising Israel’s existence? Against that, the settlements are in a different category altogether. And hummus in Damascus is in some parallel universe.

Obama is hardly the peace maker the Middle East has been waiting for. I shudder to think of all the bullies that are emboldened by the weakness conveyed in his speeches. What a perfect day it is today, D Day, to reflect on the good that can come from American power. It’s great to be loved, but sometimes it’s much more important to be respected.

“He could stop the US sending enourmous amounts of military aid and assistance to Israel. ”

I have no issue with that.

In fact, it would mean that Israel would no longer have to carry out suicidal moves to appease genocidal Islamic states.

Also, should Israel also keep the world leading technological breakthroughs and military intelligence to themselves as well? Or maybe sell to the Russians? After all, a lot of the “aid” is used to advance scientific and medical breakthroughs. Although I guess it is more convenient to say all the money is used for killing muslim babies.

Lastly, will Obama also stop the aid to Islamic states, most of which, correction, all of which are undemocratic dictatorships?

Liberal incrementalist…..no, just a sap.
Obama has no way to pressure the arabs, or China or Russia or Europe or…….but he can pressure Israel, and he will do whatever is required to find a major foreign policy win.

Obama (allegedly) met MB leaders 2 months ago

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1090403.html

Which reports this ‘exclusive’ in the Egyptian independent al-Masry al-Youm:

http://www.almasry-alyoum.com/article2.aspx?ArticleID=213703

What’s your take on this, Alex? A good thing? Gene? Any word from you?

“I do hope these American handouts become more conditional in the future.”

You know, the anti-Semites of Europe always used to maintain that the Jews only existed because of the benevolence of the gentiles. You seem to have inherited the same beliefs. I bet you wouldn’t use the term “handout” for any other nation. The reality is that much of the world receives financial benefits from the U.S. far in excess of the relative pittance Israel receives. Thus, America’s massive subsidies to Europe via NATO coupled with the cost of keeping her own troops on the ground take up a large chunk of her massive defence budget. The totally shambolic performance of Britain’s under-equipped and badly-trained armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrates perfectly just how much a fat and lazy Europe fails to pay its own way. And you must remember that a bankrupt and effectively beaten Britain was on her knees before the United States rescued her from the ingnominy of defeat during World War II (given how much real hatred of America there is in Britain one wonders why the Americans bothered)

Besides, the U.S. is given excellent value for money. She receives first-class intelligence from a stalwart ally (certainly no less stalwart than any other) together with important military bases (with the potentiality for many more) in a vitally significant region of the world. Aside from that, a majority of Americans support Israel for reasons to do with love, respect and shared values. However, America should not expect Israel to sacrifice her national interests because of the demands of a particular president any more than you should expect to own your wife and children because you help them out now and then. Indeed, the people who believe otherwise tend to be abusers of the very worst sort.

At the press conference after his speech at Buchenwald I heard Obama say words to the effect that both sides would be expected to make concessions.

I would like to see not just Obama, but also his Democratic and Hamilton-Baker advisors and speechwriting team, or any future US President and Administration for that matter, explicitly fleshing out exactly which confidence building measures, or concessions they expect to be met by both the Israelis and the Palestinians in order to advance the peace process towards the attainment of the requisites of UNSC 242.

So far, we have only heard a lot of political capital expended by the President, his advisors and spokespersons and the State Department expecting Israel to meet a US expectation of a comprehensive cessation of all present and future construction within any existing settlement, but not a murmur about an expectation for the formation of a Palestinian Unity government that will agree to and abide by previously ratified agreements between Israel and the PA.

Is the thinking that if Israel meets US expectations to cease all present and future construction in any settlement, the US will be able to convince the Palestinian leaderships to unify under a mandate that explicitly agrees to abide by previously ratified agreements between Israel and the PA?

And if the US makes no more headway with the Palestinian leaderships than the Quartet did to win a concession on this issue, then what? Is the peace process sent back to the palliative ward, or does the US Administration generate another expectation for Israel to meet, since the Palestinian leaderships can’t and won’t budge?

Call me right wing, or a pessimist, if you must Alex, Gabriel and Gene, but from what I’ve heard so far from the Obama Democratic and Hamilton-Baker Republican Administration, I have as little faith in their tactics to advance the peace process toward the attainment of the requisites of UNSC 242, as I did with the Bush-Rice Annapolis gambit.

That is unless and until, I see that the Palestinian leaderships concede to form a unified government that agrees with and promises to abide to all previously signed agreements between the PA and Israel, I don’t think the peace process is going anywhere. And should the settlement freeze actually come into effect, how long will it be able to endure, or should it be expected to endure, if the peace process comes to a grinding and extended halt again, not just because of Israeli non-compliance, but because of “red lines” that the Palestinian leaderships can not and won’t cross?

Answers on a postcard

phil, is it that you don’t know how to discuss politics intelligently at all? Or are you in a rut of some kind?

Damn, another response to a comment that was banned.

Talking about Obama’s speech, this video is doing the rounds at the moment:

http://jewschool.com/2009/06/04/16550/drunk-americans-israeli-public-opinion/#comments

Max Blumenthal decided to gauge Israeli/Jerusalem public opinion of the Obama speech by… interviewing a bunch of drunk American kids on Birthright.

Needless to say, I’ll bet there are some anti-Israel bloggers who are just lapping this stuff up right now…

Bravo Joshua.

I’d like to see how the Israeli “handouts”, which mostly come right back to the US in any case, stack up to the oil revenues that pour from the US to our “friends” in the Middle East and elsewhere around the world? And, we give aid to many of the nations in the Middle East, the amount of money poured into Iraq is enormous. It is beyond calculation at this point, I don’t think anybody even knows where it has all gone.

Speaking of which, and the Lobby That Shall Be UnMentioned, namely the oil industry – I have a word for the “realists” but it is somewhat unkind so I will keep my mouth shut on that topic.

Anyway I think people should try to listen to Obama when he suggests that we all try to open our hearts and minds a little. He was correct to mention Muslim accomplishments and also correct to remind people that Holocaust denial is just wrong (and also that attacking little kids and old ladies on buses is hardly a mark of courage).

Unfortunately Holocaust denial is a huge problem in the Middle East along with hideous antisemitism, and that in and of itself is creating conflict. Needless to say there is incitement coming from the West and that should be addressed too at some point.

As far as the settlements are concerned, I think more nuance would help matters greatly. There is no return to the pre-1967 borders but the Palestinians do need a safe home.

I am dismayed that this administration is accusing the Israelis of lying about previous understandings on Jerusalem suburbs, etc. I think that’s painting both Israel and the US into a corner which could backfire bigtime, and I agree with above comments, where’s the corresponding commitment from the other side? The whole ROR issue is still up in the air and that is a huge problem. That said – some of us lack compassion for the Palestinian people – even in our anger at all the decades of violence I think that’s a shame – can we reach within ourselves, past the fear and the anger, and try to see how our situations have come to mirror each others’ predicament?

Finally, does the Palestinian state have to be a state without Jews? I should hope not!

Who to represent the Palestinian State,Hamas or Fatah?
A state split in two with Israel in the middle?
Hamas,Hezbollah,Fatah committed to Israel’s destruction?
Excuse my scepticism.

Joshua >And you must remember that a bankrupt and effectively beaten Britain was on her knees before the United States rescued her from the ingnominy of defeat during World War II (given how much real hatred of America there is in Britain one wonders why the Americans bothered<

What a graceless comment, why do you positively gloat over the possibility of the defeat of Britain in WW2? What do you think would have happened to the occupied countries of Europe – and, considering your especial interest in them – to the surviving Jews – if America had not come to the help of Britain, who had valiantly stood alone against the combined forces of the axis powers? You have castigated Britain here before in no uncertain terms for doing little to help the Jews. (When the only way to help the Jews after the start of hostilities was to win the war.)

Do you think America allied with Britain to help the Jews, to save Britain from the “ignominy of defeat”, or because it was in the interest of America to put a stop to Hitler’s plans for a German Empire, bigger and richer and much more truculent than ever the British Empire had been – and a thousand times likelier to prepare for war to contest America’s position as the greatest world power?

There was no hatred for America in Britain in WW2.

I think it’s a very good time for Israel to be improving its links with China.

I liked the article, Alex.

Settlements are not a real obstacle to peace. Does anyone really believe that if there were no settlements, the Palestinians would be ready to make peace with Israel. There will always be another demand that will be the obstacle. When Israel withdrew from Lebanon, suddenly there was the Sheba Farms.
It is amazing that Land is being asked for peace. Israel is the one country in the region that can’t afford to give up land. Palestinians on the West Bank are hooked to Jordon the way Canada is to the U.S., same culture, language, religion, history and values.
Israel is a country to itself.

Stan

“Settlements are not a real obstacle to peace. Does anyone really believe that if there were no settlements, the Palestinians would be ready to make peace with Israel. There will always be another demand that will be the obstacle. When Israel withdrew from Lebanon, suddenly there was the Sheba Farms.”

I don’t know if people remember that when Fatah was still governing Gaza, after the disengagement but before the Hamas coup, they argued that the Israeli withdrawal wasn’t complete because there was some two or three kilometers north of the Gaza strip that belonged also to it.

Remember, this was Fatah, not Hamas.

Explanation for those who don’t know what they were talking about:

At the end of the War of Independence, in 1949, the Gaza strip was longer northwards but thinner eastwards. As part of the armistice agreements between Israel and Egypt, and to facilitate the deployment of the Egyptian army, an equal size of territory was exchanged. The Gaza strip became shorter and wider (that is why it has that extended shape in the southeast, where the Gaza airport is located).

Fatah, the supposedly moderates, forgot about the widening, but demanded to get compensated (again) for the shortening.

The Palestinians will always lie, cheat, and stall to prevent peace with the Jews. No matter if we are talking about Hamas or Fatah. I must confess I shed no tears when the Fatah “the withdrawal from Gaza was not complete” Movement was deposed by the Hamas.

Yarbles – don’t know enough specifics about the MB to comment, but generally I think talking to the various significant players is to be encouraged.

Having summed the skeptical opinions about the prospect for peace from several of the posts above, having started to read “Why The Jews” by Dennis Prager and listened to some radio discussions about Islam and Israel I come to the conclusion that the West approaches a ME peace deal as if both sides are playing to the same rules and that rule is Western Democracy-based.

Its predicated on side making agreements/treaties and sticking toi their commitments – like the Germans and Japanese after the Wars. It is based on the idea that if Israel cab have a State then the Palestinians can have one and by reaching an agreement then that is the end of it.

I truly believe that the factor we are afraid to state is that the Islamic idea is that all ME land belongs to Islam and given the historic antisemitic hatred of The Jews promoted by Islam then any concession to the Palestinians is simply helping them in their ultimate destruction of Israel.

Where is Obama’s strategy for the immediate Islamist threat of Hamas and Hezbollah. Does he think that their grievance is just that the Palestinians haven’t got a state? That simply isn’t true. Forcing Israel into concessions to create a Palestinian state is a spur for MORE attacks on Israel and Jews because its a winning strategy.

I do believe that ONLY the exercise of Israel military might against Hamas and Hezbollah can put off the inevitable. They don’t want democracies that can sign peace agreements they want Islamist states where they can persue their intended conversion of Israel back into Islamic lands.

Yet, when Israel DOES respond to Hamas and Hezbollah they have seen what happens. The West stops Israel and then investigates for War Crimes. This simply encourages Hamas and Hezbollah to make mora attacks to draw the responses that then gets them Western sympathy.

Well Obama, what is your strategy of the Islamist Terrorists surrounding Israel?

Yarbles – don’t know enough specifics about the MB to comment, but generally I think talking to the various significant players is to be encouraged.

I broadly agree, Alex. Obviously, dependant on which members of the MB…and whether this was true or not. Thanks for your response. Marc Lynch@ Foreign Policy has some intresting stuff on Obama’s policy vis-a-vis the MB…if you’re interested.

You know, the anti-Semites of Europe always used to maintain that the Jews only existed because of the benevolence of the gentiles.

Which anti-Semites would these be? Europe includes Britain. Do you have any evidence of this or is this just your unqualified opinion?

For your entertainment, and mine (having read your caustic comment), you might consider reading this article in the Daily Telegraph:

“We would go in to Liverpool and we were treated like normal people,” he said. “There was no segregation and we could go where we wanted and do what we wanted. We went dancing in the Grafton Ballroom and shopping on Whitechapel like everyone else.

“My time in England was the first time I had really felt free in my life. And I wondered why another country was treating us better than our own country, better than the country we were fighting for.”

The reality is that much of the world receives financial benefits from the U.S. far in excess of the relative pittance Israel receives.

Yes. Pray tell, who owns all those government securities again? The good ol’ US of A? China, perhaps? Do they play a role?

The totally shambolic performance of Britain’s under-equipped and badly-trained armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrates perfectly just how much a fat and lazy Europe fails to pay its own way.

Do you have any evidence that British troops are badly-trained or is this again your unqualified opinion?

And you must remember that a bankrupt and effectively beaten Britain was on her knees before the United States rescued her from the ingnominy of defeat during World War II (given how much real hatred of America there is in Britain one wonders why the Americans bothered)

Must Brits continue to genuflect before the All-Seeing Eye and be reminded of it? Will the infinitesimally small minority of Americans who resent the UK for receiving America’s largesse post-WW2 ever learn to reject pomposity and embrace magnanimity? How do you know if there’s any hatred of America (more likely jealousy) to speak of in the UK? Have you conducted a survey? Most Brits, in spite of the prevailing zeitgeist, consider it ‘a bad show’ to embody the hauteur of an armchair general or yell such things as ‘in the hooooooooole’ just as a golfer has pulled his drive into the trees. I’m wondering if your own petty cavil conceals an even deeper contempt for the UK…am I wrong? I do hope so, as I certainly do not ‘hate’ the US.

Well Obama, what is your strategy of the Islamist Terrorists surrounding Israel?

(a precis of my auto-modded contribution above)

Joshua: “The totally shambolic performance of Britain’s under-equipped and badly-trained armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrates perfectly just how much a fat and lazy Europe fails to pay its own way.”..

“under equipped”..Yes , I”m sure they would agree with you.
“Badly trained”….what? as compared to the Americans? You really are talking out of your hat and revealing the real contempt for Europe and the British that you claim they have for Americans.

Having sum med the skeptical opinions about the prospect for peace from several of the posts above, having started to read “Why The Jews” by Dennis Prager and listened to some radio discussions about Islam and Israel I come to the conclusion that the West approaches a ME peace deal as if both sides are playing to the same rules and that rule is Western Dem ocracy-based.

Its predicated on side making agreements/treaties and sticking toi their commitments – like the Germans and Japanese after the Wars. It is based on the idea that if Israel cab have a State then the Palestinians can have one and by reac hing an agreement then that is the end of it.

I truly believe that the factor we are afraid to state is that the Islamic idea is that all ME land belongs to Islam and given the historic antisemitic hatred of The Jews promo ted by Islam then any concession to the Palestinians is simply helping them in their ultimate destruction of Israel.

Where is Obama’s strategy for the immediate Islamist threat of Hamas and Hezbollah. Does he thin k that their grievance is just that the Palestinians haven’t got a state? That simply isn’t true. Forcing Israel into concessions to create a Palestinian state is a spur for MORE attac ks on Israel and Jews because its a winning strategy.

I do believe that ONLY the exercise of Israel military might against Hamas and Hezbollah can put off the inevitable. They don’t want democracies that can sign peace agree ments they want Islamist states where they can persue their intended conversion of Israel back into Islamic lands.

Yet, when Israel DOES respond to Hamas and Hezbollah they have seen what happens. The West stops Israel and then investigates for War Crimes. This simply encour ages Hamas and Hezbollah to make mora attacks to draw the responses that then gets them Western sympathy.

Well Obama, what is your strategy of the Islamist Terrorists surrounding Israel?

Needs more regression testing

Having summed the skeptical opinions about the prospect for peace from several of the posts above, having started to read “Why The J” by

Having summed the skeptical opinions about the prospect for peace from several of the posts above, having started to read “Why The J” by d and listened to some radio discussions about Isl and IsrI come to the conclusion that the West approaches a ME peace deal as if both sides are playing to the same rules and that rule is Western Democracy-based…….

to some radio discussions about and come to the conclusion that the West approaches a ME peace deal as if both sides are playing to the same rules and that rule is Western Democracy-based…….

to some radio discussions about and come to the conclusion that the West approaches a ME peace deal as if both sides are playing to the same rules and that rule is Western Democracy-based…….

Having summed the skeptical opinions about the prospect for peace from several of the posts above,

to some radio discussions about and come to the conclusion that the West approaches a ME peace deal as if both sides are playing to the same rules and that rule is Western Democracy-based…….

Having summed the skeptical opinions about the prospect for peace from several of the posts above,
“Why The J”

to some radio discussions about and come to the conclusion that the West approaches a ME peace deal as if both sides are playing to the same rules and that rule is Western Democracy-based…….

Having summed the skeptical opinions about the prospect for peace from several of the posts above, “Why The J” by d and listened

to some radio discussions about and come to the conclusion that the West approaches a ME peace deal as if both sides are playing to the same rules and that rule is Western Democracy-based…….

Having summed the skeptical opinions about the prospect for peace from several of the posts above, having started to read “Why The J”

by d and

list

list end

once again to…………..

and listened to some radio discussions about Islam and Israel

Which ones?

An incrementalist is someone who thinks that putting one foot in front of the other is the better approach if they want to go out for a drink, rather than staying in and waiting for the invention of a teleportation machine.

It seems a number of commenters here would prefer to stay indoors with the curtains closed, arguing that the impossibility of teleportation means venturing out is out of the question.

Myself, I’m a signed-up member of Hasek’s Party of Moderate Progress within the Bounds of the Law, politics with a purpose.

Wrong analogy in the Middle East context, Danish. A number of commenters here are saying that phoning the plumber is not going to get you that much-needed pint.

The unilateral Israeli Gaza withdrawal showed that a ‘land for peace’ good-faith ‘loan’ with regard West Bank and Gazan Arabs or at least those that represent them, is a bad bet.

Having trashed their credit rating so egregiously they, and onlooker, can’t expect Israel to treat them as anything other than a bad bet.

It’s going to be a long road. A good place to start would be the Hamas constitution and the institutionalized Arab Jew hatred. That’s what outside pressure should be focusing on.

The ’settlements’ are a complete smokescreen, a non issue. Israel has already demonstrated this in Sinai and Gaza.

Forcing Israel into concessions to create a Palestinian state is a spur for MORE attacks on Israel and Jews because its a winning strategy.

Precisely!

“You seem to have inherited the same beliefs. I bet you wouldn’t use the term “handout” for any other nation.”

Dont worry, I always say the same thing about places like Egypt!

“I’m wondering if your own petty cavil conceals an even deeper contempt for the UK…am I wrong? I do hope so, as I certainly do not ‘hate’ the US.”

Its a historical thing about Britain not always doing what the Stern Gang demanded.

Its a historical thing about Britain not always doing what the Stern Gang demanded.

The historical thing is that Britain never ever did anything demanded by the Stern Gang.

Jesus Tory. Are you aware of what was happening to the Jews before and during WWII and subsequently and the role played by Britain?

If not please read.

And please do not conflate the entire Yishuv with the Stern Gang. That was a tiny group which enraged the majority – even Irgun fought with Britain during WWII, which didn’t stop the disarmament and blockade of the Jews who’d fought loyally for the Empire, nor the arming of the Arabs, nor did it stop Britain from sending Holocaust survivors back to concentration camps in Europe.

Jerusalem was beseiged and starving and under attack and the Brits did what? If you don’t know please READ.

Finally I am tired, really tired, of hearing the canard that Israel was built by terror. It wasn’t. It was built by farmers, by artists, by architects, it was built by people who created a community, drained swamps, built roads and towns, often under the gun and in spite pogroms and finally in spite of open war, in the shadow of the Shoah where millions were lost.

Britain didn’t even recognize the state of Israel for months and supported the ethnic cleansing and annexation by Jordan of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem.

There are several books about this history and I strongly suggest you read some, including the betrayal of the Jews whose homeland according to the League of Nations was to have included transJordan.

Sheese.