It’s out today, here (and archived here.)
My sense of these two guys is that right now they’re circling each other warily like massive Sumo wrestlers before a match. Who will end up as Akebono? Personally, I’m betting on the guy from Akebono’s home turf, Hawaii.
(Okay, Quakers don’t bet. Sorry.)
27 thoughts on “IPS piece on coming Obama-Netanyahu spat”
Comments are closed.
“Thus far, most of the hardliners in Israel seem to assume it will be easy for the U.S. to continue to defy Obama.”
I think you mean for Israel to defy Obama?
I notice that you didn’t repeat the recently published story that Netanyahu canceled his in-person AIPAC Conference appearance for some reason, which is good because I don’t believe it is true. I started preparing for my last piece several weeks ago and N. was never on the AIPAC agenda until very recently when AIPAC added the AF general and Harman, and later Peres and N. by video.
“Since his first days in office, President Barack Obama has expressed clear support for speedy action toward the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Since then, he and his key advisers – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and special envoy George Mitchell – have all quietly but firmly stayed the course in supporting that goal.”
Was G. W Bush and his Blackberry Rice done the same and promised Mahmoud Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen was posed to the world confidently with Bush promise that before his term ending there will be Tow State ?
Now Obama, we still be fooled by their words?
Helena wrote back this:
Craig, thanks so much for the correction. I’ve sent it along to the editor at IPS and made my own correction in my archived version.
Eternal optimism must be part of the Quaker credo (if they had one). Where some of us see Obama getting his nose continually bloodied and doing nothing -Freeman, Jerusalem house demolitions, settlement construction, refusal of Gaza reconstruction, refusal to cooperate on investigations,Lieberman’s mouth, etc., etc., – Helena sees sparring and progress. I hope she is right, but I have seen no sign of spine vis-a-vis Israel in this administration. I think Netanyahu looked over the political landscape and decided that he, not Obama, is in charge.
We are at the point where some people, particularly in the blogosphere, are less concerned with the actual goal of peace and more concerned with sticking it to “the lobby” (i.e., anyone who doesn’t share a strident hatred of Israel). Whatever one’s views of the positions taken by groups like AIPAC, or for that matter one’s views of the groups themselves, it has gotten to the point where the status of these groups has eclipsed the issue itself.
Obama is cool as a cucumber. If he pressures Israel, it’s not going to satisfy a constituency that wants to see him bloody Bibi’s nose for the sake of making them feel good.
On the other hand, if he thinks that pressure can actually get something done, I think he’ll use it.
The positions that have dismayed the anti-Israel crowd are really not that significant. Obama knows that there is little to be gained by showing up at a circus like Durban II, and probably recognized that “Chas” Freeman was not so indispensable that he was needed to chair the NIC (and his bizarre ranting after he withdrew simply cast even more doubt on his qualifications).
On the other hand, when Israel announced that recognition of Israel as a Jewish state was a PRECONDITION for talks (rather than a position they would insist on as part of talks), the U.S. swatted that down in less than a day.
Helena’s piece goes so far to explaining the two day coochy coo between Suileman and Lieberman in Israel earlier this week set up in advance of Egypt, Israel and the PA toddling off to Washington.
Er, not? Could we have enlightenment, HC?
So the whole act; with the young Mossad boys of the time, regarding the poison and the antidote, kind of a mistaken plan surely looking back a decade or not? What if the king of Jordan had not been so gloriously phlegmatic? Would things be better? And for whom?
Demolitions build Jerusalem tension
Five young children cling to their mother. All of them are crying. This morning, without warning, Israeli bulldozers came to destroy their home in Jabal Mukabar area of East Jerusalem.
Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton approve. They might make some equivocal noises, but US funding of Israeli genocide will continue, US vetoes in the UN SC will continue, Obama and Hillary will continue as Israeli agents at the top of “our” US government.
“It’s like Ayalon doesn’t quite understand which one of these countries is a superpower,” the retired diplomat said.
A virus (from the Latin virus meaning toxin or poison) is a sub-microscopic infectious agent that is unable to grow or reproduce outside a host cell. — wikipedia
Rabies is a viral disease of dogs, and of all mammals really. A virus is all DNA and subverts its host by taking over the contol functions of the host organism. When the rabies virus infects an animal that animal’s behaviour changes, it becomes more aggressive. It acts in ways that are of no benefit to itself, but are of benefit to the virus that has infected it. If a rabid animal bites another the virus gets a new host before its current host dies as the direct or indirect result of its rabies infection. Rabies is directly fatal of course, but rabid animals are often killed by their potential victims on the basis of their rabid, virus-induced behavior.
Israel’s relationship to the US is like a viral infection. While most of the US seems to operate completely independently of Israel, Israel has in fact subverted the control function in the American organism. Acting through Obama, Clinton, the House, and the Senate Israel is controlling the behavior of the United States, at least in the Middle East.
The analogy only goes so far, of course. Although the US will undoubtedly succomb to the Israeli infection, directly or indirectly, there is no new host apparent for the Israeli to jump to.
At least not immediately apparent. Perhaps Israeli is banking on England, the EU, or India to become the new vector for the Israeli virus after its infection of the US has run its course?
I await the publication of this book in English.
http://www.randomhouse.de/book/edition.jsp?edi=279931&frm=true
It is the first book I have seen that speculates on the effect of US decline in the world and its shift of focus away from the Atlantic towards the Pacific, on the State of Israel.
They have to curry favour with we, increasongly appalled, citizens of Europe. Benita Fererro Waldner led the way during the recent Gaza atrocity, to much aproval.
It does serve to highlight the clause in the recent Brzezinski, Scowcroft et al report about water.
Water. Even during the worst of times Israeli and Palestinian water officials and experts have found it possible to speak and act in ways consistent with the proper administration of a scarce and vital shared resource. Still, terms will have to be reached protecting Israel’s access to aquifers lying largely beneath Palestinian territory while permitting Palestine to develop its water resources to support an expanding population as well as agricultural and industrial development. Desalination can play an important role in increasing municipal water supplies for both parties, and cooperation in the water sector can build strong ties between Israel, Palestine and Jordan.
While most of the US seems to operate completely independently of Israel, Israel has in fact subverted the control function in the American organism. Acting through Obama, Clinton, the House, and the Senate Israel is controlling the behavior of the United States, at least in the Middle East.
And only John Francis Lee is smart and perceptive enough to see it. The majority of Americans are simply too dumb.
While most of the US seems to operate completely independently of Israel, Israel has in fact subverted the control function in the American organism. Acting through Obama, Clinton, the House, and the Senate Israel is controlling the behavior of the United States, at least in the Middle East.
I don’t think that’s true. I think that the real position of Israel is more like an American fortress in the Middle East, and that Israel, though it undoubtedly has some influence in the USA, doesn’t determine American policy. The APAIC may look strong, but compared to the real powerful lobbies in the USA, the corporate lobbies, it’s nothing. If there would be a conflict of interest about US foreign policy between AIPAC and those lobbies, AIPAC would be nowhere. AIPAC is mighty as long as the American elites consider Israel as one of their essential assets.
That’s why, in my opinion, Israel’s crimes are America’s crimes; the Americans allow those crimes and give Israel the tools to commit those crimes, not because they are blackmailed, but because the US considers those crimes consistent with American interests in the Middle East.
For instance, the borders of Gaza, more than 3 months after Israel’s massacre there, are still closed, while food for Gaza is rotting in Egypt.*
There wouldn’t be any reason for this, but for American policy. One word of Obama, even if only whispered discretely in Olmert’s ears by his personal representative, George Mitchell, and those borders would have been opened months ago. But of course, Obama has no time for such trivialities. He is much too busy pretending to change the world, and to receive the applause of billions of fans all over the world, who think he’s God’s gift to humanity.
* http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=46504
Well I do agree with you menno hert.
Israel is just a special case among the many lobbies that have subverted the control function of the American organism.
But Israel is aware of its fellows and certainly plays ball with them. Most of the military aid to Israel has been spent on American weapons, for instance. And selling war is consonant with the pitch of the MIC in the USA. But there is no oil in Palestine, and the USA would never have funded the expropriation and ongoing occupation of Palestine on a cost based analysis.
The beauty of the the Israel scam is that what is doled out to Israel is cash, a portion of which is immediately turned around to secure continued funding. Through masterful public relations, I remember the phrase ‘Palestinian terrorist’ from my youth 40 years ago, the Israel Lobby was and has been able to put over their package. With a quasi-moral pitch as well : the world, the Western World anyway, ‘owed’ the Jews for what the Third Reich had done and so it was ‘only fair’ that the victors over the Third Reich foot the bill for the payback. And in fact the sums involved, although overwhelming to the Palestinian resistance, were small in an economy the size of and growing as fast as the US’ was after the Second World War.
It was a no-brainer source of continuing cash for American politicians. So the nation’s DNA was and is subverted. Washington’s interests are the virus’ interests when it comes to the Middle East.
The Israelis are not responsible for all the wrong things done by the US overseas of course, and for none of the wrong done within the country. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan were the US’ own home-grown lobbying ‘triumphs’, although some like Iraq were a convergence of interests. Israel would like the US to see the converged interests in an attack on Iran as well.
But as far as the long-sufferig Palestinians go… it’s viral DNA all the way. We have no skin in that game other than the incumbent good health of the political class in Washington DC. And that is seen to, or threatened, with no more consummate skill than exhibited by the Israel Lobby.
I don’t think that’s true. I think that the real position of Israel is more like an American fortress in the Middle East, and that Israel, though it undoubtedly has some influence in the USA, doesn’t determine American policy. The APAIC may look strong, but compared to the real powerful lobbies in the USA, the corporate lobbies, it’s nothing. If there would be a conflict of interest about US foreign policy between AIPAC and those lobbies, AIPAC would be nowhere. AIPAC is mighty as long as the American elites consider Israel as one of their essential assets.
I think that you’ve found something that we can agree on.
Israel might have been America’s Mid East fortress–perhaps land based aicraft carrier–at one point. But when its government steadfastly and aggressively pursues military and ‘legal’ oppression against an entire people within its borders it contravenes not only international law, but also the fundamental American ideals of freedom and individual rights. Yes, lots of other countries that receive American aid do this too, but that doesn’t make it right, and certainly does not justify the magnitude of America’s largess. The idea of foreign aid is to get something for those dollars: political stability for business; international agreements of conduct (law of the sea); relatively humane rules of warfare; advancement of American ideals. At this point Israel is not only being unhelpful on all these fronts, but destabiizing to America’s interests. In the current lexicon, American dollars currently being sent there are a toxic investment.
Is it antisemitic to wonder if the establsihment of the State of Israel in spite of British advice to the contrary was a mistake?
It may not be antisemitic Frank but it sure is arrogant. Who cares whether you think it was a mistake or not? Surely no Israeli.
Vadim, it is silly to call Frank “arrogant” for having an opinion. Whether anyone is Israel or anyone else cares what Frank thinks is beside the point. Do we not all have the right to think for ourselves and speak the truth as we see it? You seem not to think so.
Re: comment from… Frank al Irlandi, at April 26, 2009 04:26 AM:
….Still, terms will have to be reached protecting Israel’s access to aquifers lying largely beneath Palestinian territory while permitting Palestine to develop its water resources to support an expanding population as well as agricultural and industrial development….
Can anyone hope, much less the Palestinians, that there will be a just and fair resolution to this problem? To date the Palestinians have been robbed of their resources and will continue to be so as long as Israel has anything to do with it.
This BBC report refers.
World Bank Report
Palestinians get only a quarter of the water Israelis have access to.
The existing problems affect not just daily supply but the development of water resources, water uses and wastewater management.
“Water related humanitarian crisis are in fact chronic in Gaza and parts of the West Bank,” says the report.
href=”http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8007801.stm” rel=”nofollow”>
“Is it antisemitic to wonder if the establsihment of the State of Israel in spite of British advice to the contrary was a mistake?”
Just incredibly offensive and counterproductive. Sort of like asking someone if their family would be better off if that person’s mother decided to have an abortion.
Vadim
It may not be antisemitic Frank but it sure is arrogant. Who cares whether you think it was a mistake or not? Surely no Israeli.
My MEP cares what I think. He has just written to me asking for my vote in the elections.
I shall look at his position on EU relations with the state of Israel and see if he represents my views.
AJP Taylor’s analysis of the causes of the Second World War includes a discussion of the Mistakes made at the agreement of the Treaty of Versailles. The results are commemorated at Yad Vashem.
Joshua’s analogy is incorrect. It is a question we asked regularly about Northern Ireland and its “Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People”.
We fought a civil war in Ireland about accepting it.
Draw any analogy you like from the ex commander of the Derry Brigade of the IRA now being deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland while we await the results of the demographics.
Vadim, it is silly to call Frank “arrogant” for having an opinion.
He’s not arrogant for having an opinion Craig, he holds an arrogant opinion. We all have the right to think for ourselves and voice opinions, and we should expect others to voice criticisms (sometimes harsh criticisms) of those opinions. Sorry if I hurt Franks feelings, but his opinion is ridiculous to me –and should be to you if you think the very *fact* of Israel should be subject in any way to the whim of Irish people.
My MEP cares what I think. He has just written to me asking for my vote in the elections.
Are you voting on whether to undo the “mistake” of the State of Israel? I had no idea this was on the European parliament’s agenda, categorizing whole nations as “mistakes”.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/public/focus_page/008-52263-082-03-13-901-20090320FCS52246-23-03-2009-2009/default_en.htm
Looks like I’m right. Nothing much there about Israel at all.
It is a question we asked regularly about Northern Ireland
Why not ask it about southern Ireland? As a sovereign entity Israel is one year older. In any case, if you’re from Northern Ireland you have every duty to ask those questions Frank. If you’re from Israel, you probably don’t. An Israeli wading into core Irish sovereign issues would seem just as out of place as you seem now.
Is it antisemitic to wonder if the establsihment of the State of Israel in spite of British advice to the contrary was a mistake?
Who said anything about anti-Semitism?
Vadim
Ireland is one of the signatories to the previous EU Association Agreement so External Relations of the EU with other states is my business.
Thank you for helping me to make up my mind how to respond to this invitation to lobby my MEP regarding its replacement, enhancement or suspension.
http://www.bigcampaign.org/index.php?page=eu-israel-association-agreement-campaign
Thank you for clarifying that forming or holding an arrogant opinion on a historical event does not qualify as antisemitism.
Thank you for helping me to make up my mind how to respond to this invitation to lobby my MEP regarding its replacement, enhancement or suspension.
You’re welcome, but I don’t see the relationship to what we’re discussing (Israel itself as “historic mistake”). The ‘big campaign’ isn’t directed at righting -or even calling attention to- the “historic mistake” is it? It looks to me to be a divestment campaign aimed at specific human rights abuses. Can’t one be pro-divestment and still believe in Israel’s right to exist, ie that it is NOT a mistake? In fact a mandate to guide external Relations of the EU with other states doesn’t entitle any EU parliamentarian to question whether other states should exist or not.
I’m aware that there is a tiny minority of divestment-minded people like yourself who also (quite arrogantly) believe that Israel is a mistake that needs to be erased from the pages of time. I also know that you can’t easily express ideas that call Israel’s very existence into question while still pretending to honor sovereign integrity and the right to self-determination, principles which are also enshrined in the UN charter. If this were in fact the message of the “big campaign/embargo/mass punishment”, I think you’d find few if any EU officials willing to stand behind it.
Vadim
At least you got the translation of President Ahmadinejad’s words right.
I would be obliged if you wouldn’t try labelling me as anything in particular, or putting words in my mouth.
Labels are dangerous. I met a lovely girl on a flight out of Kiev who introdued herself as being Jewish which I thought an unusual introduction. The thought kept going through my mind all through the flight that sixty years ago she might have been massacred at Babi Yar becasue she was labelled. It does put the dilemmas of statesmen in context as you look at the options open to them in 1946-48 and work through the scenarios of what else might have been done.
I find my Palestinian friends and correspondents equally charming and all these are the faces that lurk in the background as I read Theodore Hertzl, Ghada Karmi, Avram Burg and Ilan Pappe and discuss the economic development of the Middle East.
Enough Already.
I have the answer to my question. Vaya con Dios Muchacho.