I notice that Shimon Peres has assured Barack Obama of the full cooperation of Israel in the perennial search for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Is this to soften up the Americans for the hardball to be played by Big Bad Bibi on his visit to DC on May 18? Maybe, but I doubt it. The Israelis are playing a rather interesting hand at the moment because no matter how much or little their government or people want a peaceful solution to the conflict, the other side clearly doesn’t. Hamas we know about (read their charter), but Fatah too has hardly been serious about peace-making since Taba, or maybe even ever. [What would Saeb Erekat do if there really was peace?-ed. Move to Switzerland as fast as he could.] Only one side has a decent portion of their populace committed to a two-state solution – and that’s Israel. (Yes, I know there would be more Palaestians interested if their lives were better, yadda yadda. But how do you explain the Turks turning Islamist when their lives are better? Oh, yes, it’s those intransigent Israelis. The Turks, apparently, have no control over their own lives.)
Now it may be that Obama Administration doesn’t realize or want to hear this obvious truth – that the Palestinians aren’t interested in a two-state solution – but it still doesn’t change it. So where does this leave the Israelis? By far their primary concern at the moment is Iran. And for good reason. The Obama administration appears to be offering them a quid pro quo – try to make a deal with Palestinians and we will help you with Iran. If I were the Israelis I would be thinking, depending on the definition of “help,” this is not necessarily a bad thing – especially since the Arab world isn’t especially keen on the mullahs getting the bomb either.
Sorry Roger, but I think you are misreading the situation. From what I can tell from everything I read, is that Obama is not saying ‘try to make a deal’ just ‘make a deal’ (to quote Yoda… No try). For that they offer some vague assurances of helping with Iran. Why should the Israelis trust them? I know I wouldn’t.
Point taken, Dan. But to be clear, I don’t think the Obama administration is deliberately trying to help the Israelis. Possibly the reverse. I’m just pointing out that the Israelis are in an interesting… possibly useful… situation here.
Useful situation like what, Roger? How does the US propose to “help” Israel? Sanctions? Forget it. So what’s the offer? We’ll bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities rather than leaving the job to the Israelis?
The smartest thing the Israelis can do is to firmly decide and publicly announce that they have no plans whatever to preempt development of an Iranian bomb by force.
Let the Saudis and the Europeans and Americans know that Israel will not do their dirty work.
The death of millions of Israelis by Iranian nuclear attack is not what troubles the Europeans and Americans. The fear is that a nuclear exchange in the Gulf would contaminate the oil and bring the industrial world to a catastrophic standstill.
I think the Israeli situation is desperate, not interesting.
Consider: the Israelis are the first logical target for an Iranian nuke. Even if other nations were contemplating the use of force (they’re not) they would want to wait until the Iranians used the weapon on Israel before striking, to placate their pacifist movements.
So Israel can’t just wait for some other power to move on this. President Obama is eagerly penning a moving, thoughtful epitaph for Israel as we speak. Europe wants to placate Iran, not stop it. China just wants its oil to be as secure and inexpensive as possible. Russia is behind this mess– they want to weaken US power in the region and are sowing chaos as they’ve been doing since the time of the Czars.
America isn’t willing to offer Israel anything; they won’t spare further foreign aid, aren’t willing to do anything to improve their security situation, they’re withdrawing diplomatic support. All President Obama is offering is threats to withdraw help the US is already committed to (often in exchange for previous concessions). This gives the Israelis no reason to believe us. But they also need us; we’re pretty much their only real ally in a world eager to kill them or gleefully looking the other way as others do the dirty work.
And now: via Instapundit, the US is demanding that Israel unilaterally disarm ITS nuclear program.
Why take this step now? Two possibilities: either Obama is playing hardball with more threats to drive his Israel-Palestinian accord, or he’s planning for the day when the Iranian nuke is used, to prevent Israel from “escalating” with a retaliation.
David, most OIL is radioactive to some degree.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Radioactive_waste
Dropping a bucket of sunshine on a producing well head will wreck havoc with the pumping rig, but won’t increase the NORM by enough to matter. Turning the entire ME into a series of overlapping glow in the dark craters will NOT make the OIL hundreds to thousands of feet underground any more radioactive then it already is.
It will require those famous ‘boots on the ground’ to stop the Mad Dog Mullahs (hereafter MDM) from getting nukes. Air strikes would slow down the process, but not halt it. Considering how long the MDM has been working on it, a few years delay won’t rattle their gourds much.
The window of opportunity to stop them was in ’04. The MDM closed down their program in ’04 because they knew the only thing preventing the US Army from driving to Tehran was the American Left.
I’m all in favor of the MDM getting nukes. I think they will use them on New York, Washington and other high density blue zones. That would be the best thing that ever happened to America.
I don’t see Israel as much of a target. The Muslims want to conquer Israel, not destroy it. Step #1 in returning Israel to the house of Islam is getting America off the board. The Muslims think that without American support, they can swarm Israel under. I think they are wrong, by 21st century standards.
We will see who is correct.
If I were one of those Jews who had voted for Obama, I would be too embarrassed to be seen in public. He’s worse than I thought he would be.
I can only conclude that Obama is a coward and a fool at best, an actual anti-Semite at worst, that faux “Seder” in the White House notwithstanding. What a blatant piece of pandering that was, just slumming for the cameras. His pathetic grovelling before the Saudi king is who he really is.
If Obama were hoping for an Israeli attack on Iran he could not be doing more to make it happen. By treating Israel like dirt with the help of his administration kapos like Rahm Emmanuel, he is practically telling them to attack. After all, what is the best way to ensure an attack on Iran if not letting Israel know that even the US has abandoned them? An attack is all but certain now. What has Israel got to lose at this point?
We can only hope that the Islamazoids, emboldened by what they see as the total abandonment of Israel, will overplay their hand as they have always done and do something so breathtakingly imbecilic and savage that they will, once again, show their true faces and shock the world into sense.
I think it’s really sloppy and reductionist to suggest a) that the Turks are ‘turning Islamist’ as their GDP improves and b) that that (mostly wrong) observation means it’s incorrect that if conditions were improved within the Palestinian territories would lead to greater support among the people of Palestine for a two-state solution.
First, I assume you’re referring to the rise of AKG as evidence that Turkey is getting more Islamist. Well, that’s mostly not true- AKG has a murky past for sure, but polls suggest that they were mostly supported because of their (pretty West-friendly) economic policies– joining the EU, etc.
And to the extent that Islamism is growing within Turkey, it’s in a pretty narrow sense of the term ‘Islamism’ and certainy not ‘Jihadism.’ (The new Reza Aslan book has a useful discussion about Jihadism/Islamism– I don’t entirely agree with his conclusions but it’s worth reading.)
So your argument seems to be: because Turks are getting more religious as their living conditions improve that this means that Palestinians will continue to support terrorism even if they aren’t oppressed.
Faulty premise, crazy logic.
“So where does this leave the Israelis?”
Up the creek without a paddle. The Israelis must hope that the center-right Republicans win big in 2010. God help us all if his power is not checked and balanced in the relatively near future.
First the world allows millions of Jews to be murdered, it is about 75 years later and now the world wants the Jews to solve their problem with Iran gettingpower through the nuclear use to exterminate much of America and then parts of Europe that does not fall under their control. Even the Arab world as a whole fears what Iran and it’s closest allies would do. What does it take for the eyes of the world to see what has been happening. These terrorist have been like a cancer, spreading around the world and demanding recognition everywhere, try doing this in their countries and watch the heads roll down the muddy roads. The Jews were eventionally given a small peace of sand and rock land and turned it into an Oasis and financially solvent country. Both in the science and food world, they came from ghettos and consentration camps and built something that the Arab world had not, though many of these countries did creat beautiful rugs, tapistries and metal art of all designs, but the poor stayed poor. If Israel moves first, as seems a strong possibility, everyone will be happy, but after will point at the Jews as the villians. Why, we must all ask ourselves, does the world look to such a minority of people to solve their problems if we are such a bad religous group, remember, we come from many many countries and are mixed as to culture, unlike the Iraians that enforce control of one religous belief, their culture, if you are of Catholic belief it is smarter to leave your country and live. We must all around the world start to protect our rights and not surcomb to the terrorist Muslims infiltrating our countries.
Mike Shuster, according to my friends who live, work, and travel frequently in Turkey, it is in fact at a very dangerous threshold. Just watch what the government there does with education. West friendly economic policies may be why they gained support, but that has nothing to do with their ultimate agenda. Just look at the Iranian revolution as an example of a public misled. If they control the schools, they will change the very nature of the population. And as for the distinction between Islamism and Jihadism, you are full of bunk. Try living in an Islamist but not Jihadist country if you are not a Muslim, or even if you are but are a woman. Open your eyes and see what is in front of you.
The idea that Americans don’t care if Israel gets nuked is just not true.
There are a very large number of Americans who sympathize with Israel, see it as a bulwark of democracy in a crazy Middle East, and respect it for its spunk. Americans naturally sympathize with the “little guy.” Many of us gentiles are outraged at the treatment of Israel by most of the rest of the world, and now the Osbama administration.
Only on the left do we find idiots who blame Israel for its problems and imagine that somehow a two state solution can be reached if the Israelis change their attitude. Those same lefties don’t realize that Israel would love to have peace in the region.
“There are a very large number of Americans who sympathize with Israel”
The irony is that there may be a higher percentage of Americans who sympathize with Israel—than Israelis. That country’s own citizens, on a practical level, are often its own worse enemies. Far too many Israelis have been seduced into believing they are racists. They have fallen for the con job that Israel is crapping on the normally darker skinned Palestinians.
I think the Israelis *should* make a ‘Grand Bargain’ with the United States–IF one were to be offered. The US would undertake to do whatever it takes (!) to keep Iran from getting the bomb. In return, the Israelis could freeze their settlements & committ to a two-state solution, with Hamas/Gaza on the back burner for now. The Arab world could sweeten the deal by ending all its government-sponsored racist anti-Jewish propaganda.
All this would probably require new elections in Israel. But if the Bargain was as stated above, I think the Israeli electorate would go for it.
Ask yourself why Iran is even interested in Israel. They are separated by quite a distance.
By attacking Israel, Iran is pushing its self to the head of expansionist and Jihadist Islam. They are making war on Israel for political purposes. They threaten all the Arab countries, except Syria, who they have bought.
Ask yourself why Obama is attacking Israel. Are we far enough away not to care?
This is very strange.
david thomson:
uh…huh? jews are in all colors, especially in israel of all places, from the darkest ebony to the fairest ivory. israelis do not at all consider themselves racists, although apparently you do, whoever you really are.
the conflicts in israel have to do with it being an energetic and vibrant democracy, patterning itself after the ideals of western democracy, and american zeitgeist in particular. you just forgot, or you never lived here, what sort of open democracy we had. how vibrant we once were, how productive, how proud to be americans. that’s how israelis think about their nation.
visit israel. read a book not by jimmy carter. because sadly for you, you don’t get it.
the only “help” is the tacit, or passive help 0bama will give to Iran in order for Iran to get the bomb.
If 0bama says “make a deal with Hamas” then we will “help” regarding “Iran’s nuclear intentions”- [sheesh] then Israel has to make the first typo, I mean, Israel has to make the first move. (As it is always the default position of the second party (obama) who can shrug and say “we tried” regarding Iran’s fulfillment of its nuclear ambitions, just as with whatever hamas does and doesn’t do regarding their obligations.) The road to hell. Is paved with the good intentions of ‘mediators’ who bear no direct consequence of the ‘good intensions’ the propose that others put themselves on the line for.
0bama pursues what he thinks best suited for him, and that’s the end of it.
“israelis do not at all consider themselves racists, although apparently you do, whoever you really are.”
All Western “elites” consider their respective societies guilty of racism. This is a nonnegotiable doctrine which pervades their thinking and actions. Barack Obama is a master in manipulating white guilt. Israeli’s elites are definitely convinced that their country is an imperialistic nation crapping on the darker skinned Palestinians. When push comes to shove, they readily admit it. Also, please note that my comments were carefully worded. I did not say all Israelis, but “far too many.”
@Mike Reynolds:
The Israelis have been making that bet, in various forms, for nearly twenty years now.
* They recognized terrorist organization PLO, in exchange for security.
* They signed the Oslo accords, turning the PLO into the PA and giving them full day to day governance of the territories, in exchange for security.
Each time the violence gets worse. Whether or not the Israelis would go for it hardly matters, though if they’re smart they wouldn’t. I don’t doubt that the US would offer this, it’s just that the US would simply not deliver. What, precisely, will Obama do if he had this agreement in hand? Invade Iran? Bomb them? Don’t be silly.
Israel has learned time and again that when they make concessions in exchange for peace, that they’re held to those concessions forever, while the peace never arrives even temporarily. The US will deliver high-minded promises to defend Israel, but the Israelis know and we know that we won’t deliver on them if things really got that bad. We’d find some way to call for “peace” and to “stop the escalation” and “end the cycle of violence” and demand votes in the Security Council that will be conveniently vetoed.
I’m sorry, but the eyes of the world’s diplomats are on Georgia and Ukraine and Poland and the Czech Republic. Where are our pieces of paper with those countries?
I don’t doubt that most Americans realize that defending Israel is in our interests. However, our Commander in Chief does not, and ultimately, he gets to decide. Having Israel bet its survival on his honesty is a recipe for genocide.
What I don’t know…what I would love to know…is how the Robert Malley’s are moving about behind the scenes, what is happening behind the Green Curtain.
All the happy talk about being open, wanting dialogue, making the oceans eternally exist at just the precise levels…but, yet these unsettling nominations of persons for high level policy positions…who hold some of the most virulent anti-Israel attitudes known in America today…is it simply me, or does that signal at least SOMETHING about our direction and intent?
Forget the low wattage Walt and Mearsheimer sheep…who follow that particular piece of pap and adhere to it with Velcro Ignorance.
Chas Freeman and Robert Malley take this to another level…the bottom notch…of Israeli antagonists.
Onto Roger’s point…I’m not sure it’s the Pawnestinians who are not interested in a two state solution. They have been moved around the chessboard and sacrificed for decades by the power brokers du jour in neighboring countries…they have no say in their own destiny. Making Israel the “bad guy”, fits the geo-political needs for a faux martyr.
If America turns her back on Israel…the argument about the “big bully” doesn’t play as well, but with the BBC issuing daily slander and Reuters and the AP feeding a string of lies from lying stringers…it doesn’t matter.
When slander IS the narrative, truth is an irrelevance.
(Roger I have written you a couple times, have you received my emails?)
Unfortunately, there is a great deal of bias since the American media does not display the illegal actions by the Israeli settlers and Army against innocent Palestinian civilians (not Hamas). Its about time someone like Obama stands up to Israel and says that they have to play by the same rules that everyone else does instead of turning the other cheek because of hardline lobbyists like AIPAC trying to influence every aspect of American Politics. Everyone deserves to live in peace and that goes for the Israelis AND the Palestinians. All you hear about is how bad Hamas is and how they want to destroy Israel, if you do your research they have accepted many truces as long as Israel opens borders and goes back to pre 67 agreements. Oh yea and to stop the ILLEGAL expansion of the settlements! You really don’t hear of Israeli settlers constantly harrassing their Palestinian neighbors with their weapons since they are allowed to carry them, and scare people from leaving their own homes. Its a shame the way that they are being treated. How many times has the UN condemned Israels actions, yet America has turned away because it is such a great “ally”. Good for Obama. I do hope for peace, and it has to come from both sides, Hamas has to stop attacking and learn to negotiate and I think its time for Israel to stop playing games and then acting like a big victim. And thats not anti semitic, its REALITY. People can actually have an opinion against Israel and disagree with Israel without being regarded as an anti semite. Please keep in mind Arabs are semites as well… so are the people that disagree with the plight of the Palestinians anti semites???
@Wellspring -
Thing is, this sort of Grand Bargain would not really depend on the Arabs doing anything in return. It is mainly about Iran. And either Iran gets the bomb or it doesnt; that is something concrete and verifiable. Any progress on the Palestine issue would just be frosting on the cake. Certainly if Israel did freeze the settlements, the pressure would be on the Arabs to move towards compromise. If the Arabs then refused, or turned all vague, or compromised and then reneged, Israel could just unfreeze the settlement growth and be no worse off than they are right now. The settler dead-enders do have a lot of support, though, and that’s why it would necessitate new elections. So be it.
Anyway, what’s your alternative? have Israel try to destroy the Iranian nukes on their own? Not a great option. (They’d be better off, frankly, trying a decapitation strike: destroying the top 200 or so mullahs and basiji.)
Maybe the U.S. is starting to realize that Israel’s policies are causing more problems for the U.S. then helping. The reason Iran has proxies through Hamas and Hezbollah asserting its influence in the region is because of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. Finding a two state solution is in the interest of the U.S., but Iran is of little threat to the U.S., and bombing them would sky rocket oil, and the U.S. has troops in Iran and Iraq that would be in harms way. Hopefully the days of Israel steering American policy are over. Get your buts to the negotiating table. We are not going to fight every Middle Eastern Country because you won’t push for peace. And BIBI’s hardline government with racist FM Lieberman is an excellent time to show that.
So, John, do you think Israel has *any* legitimate security issues? hmm?
“And BIBI’s hardline government with racist FM Lieberman is an excellent time to show that.”
Got any problem with the Hamas government that wants to exterminate Jews, or are you just an antisemitic hypocrite?
#21 Nina:
the west bank was part of Jordan. In Jordan’s wars against Israel, they fought to expand Jordan beyond the west bank into Israel, and of course, obliterate Israel. But, they failed. Yes, they failed. They Failed. They (The Kingdom of Jordan) Failed To take The Land East of and Beyond the “west” bank, just as they, the “Palestine Liberation Organisation” failed to take (Jordan and “west bank”) from the Kingdom of Jordan, as well.
and Now to the so-culled “Palestinian Liberation Organisation” (sneer quotation marks mine). What was the first place they attacked? What was the name of the first country they attacked for the purposes of “Liberation”? (sneer quotation marks mine again)
The “Palestinian Liberation Organisation” first attacked the country of Jordan, The Kingdom Of Jordan, and its king, King Hussein Of Jordan, to depose the kingdom there.
They failed. the “Palestine Liberation Organisation” FAILED. They Failed, They Failed To Depose the Kingdom of Jordan and its king, King Hussein of Jordan. They failed to depose the King of Jordan from his rule of Jordan (and of course, the west bank territory, which Jordan “occupied”), which Jordan, in his mind, Yasser’s mind, “occupied”, Yes, the same place, that west bank that the Kingdom of Jordan “occupied”. You know, the occupied west bank, that “occupied ‘west bank territory” [west of Jordan], that same “occupied territory” of land west of Jordan, but east of the mediterranean, and (east of) the state of Israel. The same “territory” Yassar Arab’phat wanted to depose the kingdom of Jordan for, in order to “Liberate”, what? the “west bank”? “Palestine”?
Well any way, Yasser, the AIDS “victim” failed. And where do you suppose Yasser Arab’phat, [the Egyptian, by the way] went to next, after he failed to depose the King of Jordan, King Hussein, and King Hussein of Jordans rule of Jordan and rule of the “west bank”?, the “occupied” west bank? where did Yasser go? Hmmm?
Well He, Yasser Arab’phat, went to Lebanon, and turned that country into a war zone. And made it his base from which to attack and obliterate Israel, and to “Liberate” what? the “west bank”? “Palestine”?
You speak of “ILLEGAL expansion of the settlements! “. What did Jordan’s occupation of “west bank” settlements constitute? I think Yasser Arab’phat would have described them as “Illegal”, now wouldn’t he? I mean, he, Yasser Arab’phat was trying to “liberate” the “occupied” “west bank” territories from the Kingdom Of Jordan, wasn’t he? So, in Yasser’s mind the whole thing is (was) “Illegal” then wasn’t it? You know, [the] Jordanian “occupation” of the west bank territory?
That is the reason why he, Yasser Arab’phat fought the Kingdom of Jordan’s ‘illegal’ “occupation” of the “west bank”, now wasn’t it?
“How many times has the UN condemned Israels actions”?
How many times has the “U.N.” condemned the actions of, oh, say Saddam Hussein? North Korea? Iran? Myanmar?Darfur?
Many times.
How often has the “U.N.” condemned the practice of slavery in saudi arabia?
None.
The U.N. is worthless for what they do, as for what they don’t do.
Before Yasser Arab’phat fought Israel from the base he had established in Lebanon, he fought the Kingdom of Jordan, to depose the rule of Jordan’s King Hussein there in order to take control of (what would have been) ‘formerly” Jordanian occupied” west bank’ territory, in order to attack Israel, from (what would have been) his (would’ve been) base in west bank, in order to attack and obliterate the state of Israel, from that base (in west bank)
So, from his base in the conquered (former) kingdom of Jordan (and from west bank), Yasser Arab’phat would’ve continued on and “Liberated” “Israel” from its occupation of the U.N. mandated state of “Israel” from his base there in west bank and Jordan.
Just as hamas, and fatah both plan to do from their bases in west bank and Gaza. and Israel knows this, whether, or even if 0bama pretends not to know this. But he does. He being 0bama knows this, no matter what he tries to manipulate, and fails to accomplish.