In the Arena

Israel’s Diversions

Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is playing with fire on two fronts–its ridiculous anti-Iran rhetoric (which isn’t as ridiculous as Iran’s anti-Israel rhetoric, but still…) and its continuing effort to build and increase the illegal settlements on the West Bank. When the Netanyahu government took down an illegal settler outpost a few days after Bibi’s meeting with Obama, my first reaction was: this is exactly what the Pakistanis do when confronted with their covert support for the Taliban–they arrest someone (usually someone not affiliated their intelligence services) to placate us. Actually, come to think of it, what the Pakistanis do is more helpful than what the Israelis do. At least, there’s one less bad guy on the streets. The Israelis take down a settler outpost while allowing others to open and  doubling down on the expansion of existing settlements on Palestinian lands. The unstated delusion is that Palestinian lands can be populated over time by Jewish fanatics, who tend to procreate as assiduously as the Arabs do. That is simply intolerable. It is a form of aggression never mentioned by the American Likudniks who rush to Israel’s support, even when Israel is acting illegally and in ways likely to decrease its security in the long run, by further alienating the next generation–demographically, much greater than their parents–of Palestinians.

Netanyahu’s “crazy mullah” rhetoric is also foolish, as Fareed Zakaria explains today in a column over at Brand X. I’m not as sure as Zakaria that Iran doesn’t want a bomb–or, at least, the capability of putting one together quickly (which the Japanese apparently have), but the fierce salivation of American Likudniks over the prospect of war with Iran is likely to cause the Obama Administration grief before too long. Israeli saber-rattling is one way to ensure that Iran will move as quickly as possible to build a deterrent capability. 

The President has a big speech to the Muslim world coming in less than 2 weeks, to be delivered in Cairo. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, he has to say about Israel’s illegal settlement-building. And it will be interesting to see how the Obama Administration approaches Iran in the weeks that follow its June elections.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • bitterpill8

    Ehud Barak came out with a warning about settler outposts that will be dismantled forcibly if they don’t do so voluntarily. How credible is this, Joe? Just as Netanyahu’s antics make me sceptical about any Israel overtures to Palestine Zakariah’s piece seems to go too far in the other direction: a benign and calculating Iran? I don’t know but it would help to have a clearer picture of the competing centers of power in Iran.

    A collective plague of the houses of Netanyahu and Ahmedinejad.

  • 53_3

    I’m hoping that Ahmedinejad gets the bum’s rush in June. Iran, if there ever is to be a resolution to the issues between Israel and itself, is going to need someone who doesn’t keep stoking extremism.
    .
    With a moderate frontman, Netanyahu’s government will deflate like a pricked balloon, I think. They have the same legitimacy as Bush & Co. in that their only selling points are fear and hate.
    .
    If Iran gives the gift of moderation in June, it’s my hope that Obama will be able to wield a much heavier club when it comes to Israel.
    .
    These BS shell game with the settlements, constantly moving goalposts for peace, along with impossible tasks* make it clear that Israel is just playing games, and are not really interested in peace.
    .
    *If Israel couldn’t defeat Hamas in Gaza, what in hedubblehockysticks would make anyone think for even a moment that Abbas can?!?! Riddle me that, batman…

  • 53_3

    I’m with bitterpill8 on this. Do you think you could do an overview on who is moving and who is not in their June elections?

  • sevenoaks07

    JK: During the Bush years the Likudniks had an inside man, Eliott Abrams (he of the Col Ollie North shenanigans) in the White House. The question: is Rahm Emanuel (a former IDF soldier) an American or an Israeli on this issue. I am assuming that he is a dual citizen given his military service in Israel. See how complicated this gets?

  • Joe Klein

    Bitter and 53–

    The general feeling in the US government is that Ahmadinejad has to be considered the favorite on June 12–especially since the candidate closest to the Supreme Leader, Ali Larijani, apparently has chosen not to run. The reform faction is divided between two candidates. But there is a second conservative in the race as well, Rezae, who has been critical of Ahmadinejad’s over-the-top rhetoric.

    One very serious caveat. I’ve been reading Azadeh Moaveni’s excellent, Honeymoon in Tehran, and her account of the 2005 Iranian elections should be kept in mind: Everyone assumed Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was going to win. Ahmadinejad wasn’t even mentioned in most commentaries. He was a complete–and not entirely welcome–surprise to the religious leadership. The actual electioneering is just beginnng in Iran. We’ll see what happens.

  • bitterpill8

    Joe: thank you for a prompt response and for pointing me to reading: Honeymoon in Teheran it is. I take your point: what looks acceptable to me may not be what Iranians want and my understanding of their politcs is not up to snuff. But I am willing to be educated.

  • rustyreturns

    Wow, I didn’t realize that Emanuel was a “former IDF”. Amazing. I would assume then that Obama’s diplomacy would be somewhat skewed because of it, if it is accurate.
    .
    Perhaps a more rational vote from the Iranians as a whole will prevail as a new President in Irans is elected in this new election cycle. But, I am not optomistic that this will happen as Joe seems to be.
    .
    I for one believe that Netty should keep the hammer down, and at least give the Iranians the belief that they will attack if provoked further. Obama should stay out of it politically, and not try to put the brakes on any Israeli attack if they choose to do so. A nuclear armed Iran is not good for anyone in our world.

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    Joe
    .
    One thing about Zakaria’s article which I made note of was that the Supreme Leader of the past and the present have made statements saying that Muslims having nuclear weapons is “immoral” and “un-Islamic”. Quite honestly to me this was the most persuasive part of Zakariya’s article because how does one reconcile the notion that Iran is full of religious extremists who want nukes with the reality that the religious leader of Iran has spoken out against them on a spiritual basis? If Iran is truly a theocracy and most think it is, then how can the Supreme Leader make these kinds of statement yet still seek nuclear weapons? I mean Iran makes statements all of the time about not supporting terrorism, however they will never speak out against jihad or jihadists. They know that even if they can’t cop to the attacks they have to maintain credibility with their people by witholding open denouncments of the idea of waging jihad. So to me that even gives more credibility to them denoucing nukes whether they be for them or any other Muslim country. Now obviously they could lie but it just doesn’t seem like a lie that would be reconcillable even with their own people.
    .
    On the flip side isnt it about time that we held politicians who make allusions to Iran seeking nukes feet to the fire and make them quantify those statements with facts? And if they can’t shouldn’t we stop taking their words as truthful?

  • 53_3

    “Everyone assumed Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was going to win. Ahmadinejad wasn’t even mentioned in most commentaries.”
    .
    It seems to me that Rafsanjani was a victim of Bush’s polarizing foreign policy. If only…
    .
    Very, very bad news here:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8066389.stm
    .
    Houston, we have a serious problem. Abbas, who is the only moderate left, now has absolutely nothing whatsoever to show for his efforts.
    .
    Joe, as much as I know you don’t like them consider this:
    .
    What Palestinian, under the circumstances, wouldn’t at least consider Hamas in the next election?

  • bitterpill8

    SG: I have read the Koran, in translation, over the years and have not come across any reference to nuclear weapons. So I am guessing that the words referred to are general and c786. I saw Zakaria on CNN GPS with a group and one question came up thrice, at least: Israel has “200 nuclear devices ( I assume they have a quantity ) and yet no one sees them as a threat against their Islamic neighbours. Yet one Iranian bomb threatens armageddon. Iran resisted the Iraqi invasion; but they have not initiated a cross border invasion directly altho’ they are engaged in region’s proxy wars. By the same token Israel has throughly penetrated the various Palestinian political parties and “security” agencies and conduct their own proxy wars. The US record is not pritine, also.

    Also heard Tzipi Livni and realised its one thing being in power and another being out.

  • cfukara

    JK says:
    ” … Jewish fanatics, who tend to procreate as assiduously as the Arabs do.”

    ouch!

    .

    bitterpill8 Says:
    ” .. Iran resisted the Iraqi invasion; but they have not initiated a cross border invasion directly .. By the same token Israel..”

    Did invade Iraq’s and Lebanon’s sovereign space and bombed their facilities and killed innocent civilians – and threatens to do so in neighboring countries again and again ..

    But, Rahm Emmanuel and his band of “Israel uber-alles” crusaders in Washington insists that Iran is the threat in the region.

    [Probably we should not be bothered - except that the beleagued, tax-paying, hard-working, very hard-working American hillbillies who foot the bill to feed Israel's insolence are never accorded
    (at least on behalf of USA's 30 million starving kids)
    the (constitutional) opportunity to vote on whether this "tax without representation" must continue.]

  • redraven937

    bitterpill: I think the reason why most people equate a nuclear-armed Iran with Armageddon is not because Iran itself would launch anything, but because it would conceivably make it simple for state-sponsored terrorists to get access to nuclear weapons. It’s the same reason why everyone is sweating over Pakistan considering the Taliban is only about 100 miles away from the Big Red Button and all the ICBMs said button controls.

  • rose83

    SG, I don’t remember a lot of criticism of Pakistan’s nuclear test on religious grounds. But to suggest an answer for your larger question, the Iranian government’s religious and political arguments are completely incoherent. For example, they insist women be veiled for religious reasons yet security guards routinely grope women. And there are some twisted religious justifications for nuclear weapons (although as far as I know Muslims don’t have that crazy rapture wish); many people in the Islamic world were in fact very happy about Pakistan going nuclear. Given their lack of a deterrence against an increasingly belligerent Israel, nuclear weapons have to be very tempting to many Iranian leaders.
    .
    And I enjoyed your guest blog post about preventative detention. I tend to agree, although I’m still thinking things through…

  • formerlyjames

    On the nuclear issue, I have said it before and I will say it again. Russia/US alliance. The piss ants can’t begin to challenge that.
    .
    Years ago, when I was 13, I plodded through a best seller by J. Edgar Hoover called “Masters of Deceit”, about the threat of communism. I only understood about half of it, and the half I grasped was only due to brainwashing in Catholic parocial schools. I have always loved the phrase, masters of deceit, and as I get older and older I come to realize how pervasive the concept is, politically, ideologically, and (horrors) economically.
    .
    USA/Russia, Russia/USA. Friends on earth just like in space. Negotiation with Isreal or Iran is just likely to be more of the same. Senseless war and human suffering.

  • jcapan

    Joe, did you note this in Pino”cheney”s speech?
    ~
    “They [the terrorists] have never lacked for grievances against the United States. Our belief in freedom of speech and religion…our belief in equal rights for women…our support for Israel… — these are the true sources of resentment…”
    ~
    http://www.alternet.org/audits/140200/say_what_cheney%3A_support_for_israel_feeds_terrorism/
    ~
    A gaffe says McGovern, but I’d deem it Freudian. Elsewhere in his piece:
    ~
    ‘I wanted my 10-year-old grandson to learn a nice word to describe the arguments in the former Vice President’s speech, so he has now learned “disingenuous.” Today we’ll study “superficial,” for that is the right adjective to assign to both Cheney and President Barack Obama as they addressed the threat of “terrorism,” the threat always guaranteed to resonate among Americans — much like the threat of communism did, not too many decades back.’

  • formerlyjames

    jcapan, that is an interesting link. Muslims don’t really hate freedom. They don’t really care about freedom. It is not really the issue. They do recognize being tied down and hit over the head and told to fight fair. That can be infurriating. The US has followed such a policy since Truman. Stirred still more by the fiction of the book Exodus, and the stirring strains of the subsequent movie. What a long dark alley we have walked down. But back to Cheney, he tells all. And grandchildren can benefit from the doublespeak he offers.

  • Commenter 2B named later

    I heard a radio story where they were talking to these evil settlers. They didn’t sound like fanatics. They just sounded like people who were excited about having a nice new place to live. Not that I support settlements, but whatever the intentions of the powers-that-be that are creating them, I would guess that most of the people who live in them are just regular people for whom the chance to have a nice new house outweighs the guilt of whatever small role they play in oppressing the Palestinians.
    .
    Make of that what you will. I just thought it was interesting.

  • tilliswynette

    Back in the time of Elliot Abrams and Charles Krauthammer, the establishment told us that the road to peace began in Baghdad. Netanyahu came to town both to panhandle money for future wars and convince America that the road to peace begins in Tehran. However, if Americans take a closer look, they’ll see that the road to peace begins in Jerusalem.

  • yutsano

    bitterpill: I think the reason why most people equate a nuclear-armed Iran with Armageddon is not because Iran itself would launch anything, but because it would conceivably make it simple for state-sponsored terrorists to get access to nuclear weapons.
    -
    Call me crazy or cynical or maybe I just don’t have the concern troll gene, but even if the Supreme Leader were to suddenly go against what he and his predecessor have been preaching for decades and Iran does decide to get the bomb, it will be kept under very tight controls. Now that may not preclude sharing how one is MADE, but I don’t think they’re just going to hand one over to Hezbollah and say “Allah be with you”. The prevailing winds would make that an ecological disaster for them and they know it, which is why they could never nuke Israel even if they do get a bomb. They are fanatical yes but not suicidal.

  • formerlyjames

    Commenter 2B, those nice people you speak of are not just theives, but also instigators of international terrorism with the complicity of USA foreign policy.

  • bitterpill8

    We mourn our dead tomorrow. Meanwhile we have all kind of double talk when it comes to Iran and Israel. We have lost our sense of values and our sense of direction. Our country for good or ill has been hijacked by the Likudniks; and our politicians don’t know the difference between putting America first or Israel first. So dumping on Iran is the default position.

  • jcapan

    Ah, Tillis, the joys of perpetual warfare are myriad, warmly embraced by both parties and our propagandist media.
    ~
    As some deviant writer once said:
    ~
    “War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength.”

  • jcapan

    B/C it’s relevant to everything:
    ~

  • sacredh

    As a great philosopher once said “Give Peace a Chance”.

  • Commenter 2B named later

    Commenter 2B, those nice people you speak of are not just theives, but also instigators of international terrorism with the complicity of USA foreign policy.
    .
    I didn’t say they were nice people. I just said they were people acting in what was apparently their own best interest, with the full support of their government. It may be clear to us that it isn’t in their long-term best interest to continue these policies, but we’re not the ones who would be giving up nice new houses in nice neighborhoods by doing the right thing. And of course, even if we did give them up, someone less scrupulous than us would take them anyway.
    .
    It’s easy to judge, though, isn’t it? Do you have a nice house? Why don’t you sell it to an Israeli and go live in a Palestinian slum, and then preach about how bad the Israeli government is?
    .
    That was pretty hostile, but the point I’m trying to make is that you have to understand the actual choices people face. If you were actually facing the choice…
    A. Live in a slum and hope your kids don’t get blown up by a random rocket attack
    B. Live in a nice, new neighborhood with pleasant neighbors where you kids could go to a good school and not be at risk from Palestinian terrorists
    …what are you going to choose? Honestly???

  • formerlyjames

    Commenter 2B, some of those settlers may be what you describe…normal people making the best of what is available, meaning no harm and with the support of their government. I don’t know the breakdown, but many are Zionists, who left comfortable places like the USA to go there as much a statement as a pursuit of normal life.
    .
    As for government support, I have to dismiss that point on the simple grounds that the government is wrong, and would not have been allowed to be wrong for so long without the wrongheaded US foreign policy.
    .
    As for my own house, it is modest, and comfortable, and mine. I doubt that I could sell it to any settler for any price, because it makes no religious statement. It is in a secular American neighborhood. And the point of Palestinian slums is? Lost me there. Palestinian slums and refugee camps and misery is what the residual discussion is about, I think.
    .
    Your A and B final points would apply more to the Palestinians than any Isrelis. What is the tally on the rocket fatalities vs. the attack on the Palestinians? I forgot, but on the order of 5 to 2000.

  • formerlyjames

    C2B, I failed to mention the most important thing about my house. I did say it is mine, but let me emphasize that I hold a clear and legal title. There is no question as to the ownership provence. All legal.

  • fhmadvocat

    Commenter 2B,
    You have to understand that settlers come in many modes. The Israeli government encourages settlements by offering cheap housing. So people go and live in cheap housing. However that does not make it right. If a guy offers me a car for way undervalue, I know something is not right. Even if I buy it without knowing it was stolen, I have to give it back.

    That said, every Israeli understands the situation with the Palestinians. No one who moves to a settlement is unaware of the implications.

    The other group are the religious fanatics who insist on living in any part of Eratz Israel (which actually would include parts of Jordan as well). Many of these people build illegal settlements, which the Israeli government tears down once. Then these people move right back, and usually the Israeli government does nothing.

    A little bit of history for you. When the Israeli conquered the West Bank and Gaza. ALL settlement building was illegal. However, it did not stop settlers to moving in. Over time, the Israeli government, at best turned a blind eye, or at worse, encourage the building of settlements. Israeli politics has a lot to do with it as well. All the major political parties needed settler parties to form coalition governments, so as a concession, these governments allowed settlements to grow at will.

    The problem is how can you create a separate Palestinian state when Israel has large tracts of Palestinian land. How can we fairly split a pizza when while we are discussing sharing, I am constantly eating pieces and expect you to “share” what little is left over?

  • Commenter 2B named later

    I was just trying to say that some of them are NOT Zionists, just people who happen to be benefitting from Zionists initiatives. But I don’t know the breakdown either.
    .
    It’s kinda like the smoking ban that Wisconsin just enacted. Yes, you can argue the public health aspect, etc. But it’s not like businesses are not REQUIRED to accommodate smokers, and frankly I think it should be up to the business to decide their own policy. But since I hate smoking so much, I’m glad it passed anyway.
    .
    Obviously kicking some smokers out in the rain is very different from bulldozing people’s homes, so I hope the point I was trying to make with that analogy was not completely lost.

  • formerlyrainbow68

    sacredh: Night at the Museum did too come out this weekend.

  • sacredh

    formerlyrainbow68: My post was poorly worded. I should have said we were going to go see it next weekend. We never go to see a movie on opening weekend because if the theater is packed, I wind up blocking the view of the people in back of me. Being tall sucks.

  • spob
  • spob
  • http://ikejakson.wordpress.com/2009/05/27/more-of-the-same-from-joe-the-prattler/ More of the same from Joe the Prattler « Ike Jakson’s Blog

    [...] Israel’s Diversions [...]

  • http://ikejakson.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/china-on-the-move-part-two/ China on the move [Part Two] « Ike Jakson’s Blog

    [...] if that is not enough diversion from priorities Swampland calls Israel’s Diversions as the problem and flies into Israel saying “Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is playing [...]

  • http://ikejakson.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/building-bridges-burning-others-an-incredible-journey/ Building Bridges, Burning Others – An incredible Journey « Ike Jakson’s Blog

    [...] Israel’s Diversions [...]

  • http://ikejakson.wordpress.com/2009/06/11/building-bridges-burning-others-an-incredible-journey-special-update-for-swampland/ Building Bridges, Burning Others – An incredible Journey Special Update for Swampland « Ike Jakson’s Blog

    [...]  Israel’s Diversions [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus