Middle East Clarity

Bibi would face a vote of no confidence so fast he would still be gasping for breath as the door hit him on the way out.

Not sure if the fallout would leave Livni as PM or not, but it would be interesting.

Wow.
.
I can’t believe I’m reading this.
.
I’ve never seen analysis of US involvement in the Israel/Palestine question in Time Magazine this honest, this fact-based, this realistic…ever, I believe.
.
Bravo, Joe Klein.
.
Let’s hope that the realists in the Obama Administration are listening.

It’s about time people begin to acknowledge that we have a huge amount of leverage to get the Israeli’s to do what we want.
.
Now cue the calls of antisemitism…

My goodness. Even by Klein’s standards, this is very sloppy work.
.
Klein writes “Boot calls it ‘grandiose’ for American diplomats to ask our Israeli allies to negotiate a peace deal that will guarantee Israel’s right to exist within internationally recognized borders.” Actually, no he doesn’t.
.
Boot actually calls it “grandiose” that “for any American policymaker to think that he or she can bring these age-old enemies into accord, to assume that the only thing standing in the way of agreement was the ineptitude of the previous administration.” Boot accuses many past Republican and Democratic administrations with this grandiosity. (Did Klein even read Boot’s posting?) Boot’s central point was that the insistence by the Palestinians on the “right of return” is a deal breaker. It is no surprise that Klein ignores this accurate statement.
.
Klein continues, “It is in the best interests of the United States for the Israelis to make this deal. It is also in the best interests of the Israelis.” Er, what deal? We know what deals have been offered by Barak and Olmert, but what deal has been offered by the Palestinians?
.
Finally, Klein writes “The Neocon-Likudniks have neither Israel’s nor our best interests at heart.” Next time Klein rambles on and accuses Republicans of questioning someone’s patriotism, remember this statement.

mrein:

Er, what deal?

Perhaps you missed it when he wrote:

a peace deal that will guarantee Israel’s right to exist within internationally recognized borders

Joe Klein then writes

It is in the best interests of the United States for the Israelis to make this deal.

, which is true, although, being an American, I am obviously more concerned about the deal being in US interests than in Israel’s.
.
Finally, Joe Klein writes about how we might begin to influence Israel to make that obviously necessary deal:

The Obama Administration…should start by putting a hold on all economic and military aid to Israel; the aid should not be discontinued, just held, for a nice long review until the Netanyahu government comes to understand that Jerusalem must be the capital of both Israel and Palestine, and that if you actually want peace, you don’t build illegal settlement colonies in the Palestinian capital.

That inescapably accurate analysis seemed to miss your critical eye as well.

“…The Obama Administration may have to be a bit less “grandiose” in dealing with Netanyahu’s irredentist government. It should start by putting a hold on all economic and military aid to Israel…”
.
Gee, I wonder what liberals would think about that idea…since the frickin’ 70s.

“Next time Klein rambles on and accuses Republicans of questioning someone’s patriotism, remember this statement.”

The first victim of the Roman Empire was the Roman Republic. The Neocons are full-blooded patriots of the American Empire. Of the American Republic, not so much.

mrein–

Just to make this perfectly clear. The general, accepted guidelines for a deal are four:

1. return to 1967 borders, more or less (land swaps to be negotiated so that most of the current settlements become part of Israel).

2. Jerusalem as the capital of both countries

3. international supervision of the religious sites in the Old City.

4. No right of Palestinain return to Israeli areas, although there is the possibility of negotiating reparations for those Palestinians who were driven off their land in 1948.

I favor this deal. So did George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

Oh dear, Klein.
.
This is only a step above from your insistence that the Palestinian Authority offer a concrete reciprocation to Israel’s offer to possibly, and temporary, abate its illegal construction of illicit settlements in the West Bank. You called that diplomacy, that is capitulating to Israel’s verbally offered 6 month freeze on illegal conduct (which it never carried through on). Yet, you insisted that the Palestinians respond to that insulting “offer” by caving to Israel’s intransigence. Beautiful.
.
This time, you claim, falsely, that Olmert and Sharon, two of Israel’s most notorious war criminals, have offered “grandiose” peace. Ha! Peace through war, perhaps. That is, genocidal ethnic cleansing. Sure when there are no Palestinians left, surely there will be peace among Israelis. Ariel “the Butcher” Sharon! Grandiose peace? What? Ehud Olmert. The same Olmert who authorized the relentless bombing of Lebanon in 2006, killing over 1,000 civilians in response to an act of aggression by Hezbollah? The same Olmert who authorized Operation Cast Lead in January, resulting in 1400 dead and 5000 wounded Palestinians? 13 Israelis died. Oh! The joys of proportionality! Israel first violated the ceasefire in November of 2008, by the way. Then argued that Hamas violated it and subsequently bombarded Gaza mercilessly. Olmert’s version of peace. You make me nauseous, Joe Klein.
.
http://www.theinternationalonline.com/articles/87-us-plan-for-mideast-peace-delayed
.
http://www.theinternationalonline.com/articles/97-un-human-rights-council-passes-resolution

1. How can we have a return to pre-1967 borders and give Israel control over the majority of the illegal settlements in the West Bank, which were occupied in 1967 and thereafter. Is “a return to pre-1967 borders” merely a euphemism for expanding Israel’s borders through land-swaps to then consider them legitimate?
.
2. Ok
.
3. Ok
.
4. Of course not! Why would Israel, the Jewish “democracy” allow those pesky Arabs back into their homes?

Joe- I’d love to see the US use its leverage on Israel to effect change in the Middle East, but I’m not sure who pulls the strings on the military aid. I’m sure the administration has some say in the matter, but it seems to me that congress would have to lead on the issue. If that is the case, then the the recent House vote on the Goldstone Report is bad news.

Klein writes: “The general, accepted guidelines for a deal are four.”
.
“Accepted” by whom? Those were the parameters of an offer made by Barak in 2000, and again by Olmert. As Boot accurately noted, but Klein still fails to address, the Palestinians have shown no willingness to entertain such a “deal.”

stuartzechman writes: “That inescapably accurate analysis seemed to miss your critical eye as well.”
.
Well, I wanted to be charitable to Klein by not pointing out all of his mistakes, but since you asked . . .
.
Israel is obsessed with its security and its survival. Nothing, absolutely nothing, will make Israel make a deal that they believe will put it at risk.
.
Since Israel’s previous withdrawals from territory (in Lebanon and in Gaza) have led in both cases to those areas being used as military staging grounds for attacks on Israel, Israel is unwilling to vacate the West Bank without concrete assurances that similar attacks won’t come from there. Rocket attacks from the West Bank could actually reach all of Israel and shut down its international airport.
.
So there is no pressure that the U.S. could put on Israel to put itself in this type of jeopardy. All that cutting off military assistance to Israel (i.e., the sale of American military equipment) would do is: (1) lead Israel to buy those weapons from Russia, to which Israel is improving its relations; (2) cause layoffs in American military factories; and (3) embolden Israel’s neighbors by removing America’s security guarantee, thereby making a fullscale war much more likely. It’s no accident that Israel has not been directly attacked by its neighboring countries since the US-Israel alliance became strong in the 70s.
.
Accurate analysis?

…the the recent House vote on the Goldstone Report is bad news.
.
Craven, despicable, embarrassing Congressional cretins.

A point of curiosity- if Israel hasn’t been attacked by its neighbors since the 70s, then what the hell was it doing in Gaza this last summer and 2006, not to mention Lebanon in 2006 and the early 80s?

I said “neighboring countries, ” not non-state actors, such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

mrein-

And you’re surprised that Israel faced increasing violence after withdrawing from Gaza and Lebanon? Israel illegally occupied Gaza for 40 years. In Lebanon, 18 years. Were these people supposed to be overjoyed that the oppressive, brutal, and humiliating occupation had been lifted and rhetorically sold to the world as peace? They were outraged and finally the iron fist was off of their throats. They hit back! Naturally! Would you have not done the same? Ask yourself that honestly? Had you endured a life of occupation, personally been humiliated and oppressed, lost family members and friends, had your home and person constantly violated by foreign soldiers, would you not strike back at your first opportunity? Think of that.
~
Essentially, your justification for Israel’s continued illegal presence in the West Bank is this: Israel engaged in decades of a brutal and oppressive occupation. Israeli actions radicalized those living under occupation. Israel departed Gaza and Lebanon leaving a dysfunctional state of chaos behind. Israel subsequently was faced with a radicalized movement aimed at inflicting on Israel that which Israel inflicted on it. This serves as a lesson for occupiers everywhere: do not relinquish occupation, lest the occupied rise up! Justifying injstices in the name of self-preservation? Nicely done!

mrein:
.
Thanks so much for your response.
.
A quick clarification, if you wouldn’t mind:
.
When you write:

All that cutting off military assistance to Israel (i.e., the sale of American military equipment) would do is: (1) lead Israel to buy those weapons from Russia, to which Israel is improving its relations;

that doesn’t quite make sense.
.
Yes, Israel receives over $3 billion a year in US military aid ( link )

Israel has received more U.S. military assistance than any other country, both in terms of grant aid and military sales on a concessional basis. However, unlike other countries who receive military aid and are required to spend the money in United States, Israel may spend 25% on its domestic military projects.

, from which over 75% is spent on US arms, that is certainly clear fact.
.
But when you assert that a temporary cessation of that $3 billion dollars in aid would “lead Israel to buy those weapons from Russia,” the obvious question would be “With what money?”
.
How would not giving money to Israel to buy its weapons from us then lead to it buying those weapons from Russia?
.
Doesn’t that sound a bit nonsensical to you?
.
Do you mean to suggest that Russia can ultimately be expected to provide billions of dollars of unaccountable moneys to Israel, from which the Israelis will then purchase Russian weapons?
.
Hmmm…
.
In my mind that is an unlikely scenario, but I’d be willing to entertain the argument, if you’re willing to make it…
.
Thanks in advance for this clarification, mrein

stuartzechman-
.
Thank you for your well-reasoned response.
.
I fully acknowledge that it would not be an instant or a painless process for Israel to forego the $3 billion in annual aid or the opportunity to buy American weapons. But the Israeli economy is (relatively) booming, so Israel is not quite as dependent on U.S. aid as, for example, the Palestinians or Egyptians. Israel also manufactures many of its own weapons.
.
As for whether Russia would sell weapons to Israel, I don’t see why not, especially if the price of oil is falling. I would imagine that Russia would see it as quite a coup to peel off an American ally and gain influence with the dominant military power in the middle east.
.
My central point stands, however, that Israel will not do anything that it feels will jeapordize its security.

Exiled_At_Home wrote (among other things): “Ask yourself that honestly? Had you endured a life of occupation, personally been humiliated and oppressed, lost family members and friends, had your home and person constantly violated by foreign soldiers, would you not strike back at your first opportunity? Think of that.”
.
Well, let’s look at the Jews of Europe and Israel, for example. Or the Kurds of Iraq. Both of those groups of people were interested, primarily, in building a state for their peoples, so they refrained from violent revenge despite enduring great hardship. Indeed, Israel and German developed an alliance in relatively short order.
.
So, to answer your question, no. I do not think that all people who find themselves freed from occupation instantly seek violent reprisal. To claim that the Palestinan groups who do commit this violence (Hamas and Hezbollah) have no choice in the matter acts to infantilize them. They have a choice in the matter and can choose state building, as Salaam Fayaad is so heroically doing in the West Bank right now, instead of terrorism.

The Russian government despises Israel, more so than it does the US.

“The Russian government despises Israel, more so than it does the US.”
.
Well, that’s just false. Look at the recent warm meetings between Lieberman and Putin.
.
I think you might be thinking of 20 years ago, not now.

By compounding profound misstatements with naive idealism, mrein, you do yourself a great disservice. Hezbollah, to be accurate, is a Lebanese group of Shia heritage. Hamas, on the other hand, is Palestinian and Sunni. Let’s not call everyone Palestinians.
~
With that said, European Jews did not turn to terrorism after years of oppression? Interesting. Stern Gang? Irgun? Haganah? In case you are unfamiliar, these are the Jewish terrorist groups that attacked British targets in Palestine and ethnically cleansed Arab towns prior to the 1947 UN Partition Plan. Many of them were fresh-off-the-boat European Jews. Led by Menachem Begin (future PM of Israel), their terrorist ranks were absorbed into the newly formed Israeli army, the IDF. Israel was born out of terrorism. Israel embraced terrorism from the first day. And it still does. The 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel, which killed nearly 100 civilians, was commemorated and celebrated by Israeli PM Netanyahu in 2006 (?) and its perpetrators were called “freedom-fighters.” Stay classy (and hypocritical) Israel!

mrein:
.
Leaving aside for a moment the inevitable question of what concessions Russia might…insist upon, shall we say, from Israel, should she provide anywhere near the billions of dollars annually that we’ve been forking over for no comparable gain, I’d like to focus on this last assertion of yours:

My central point stands, however, that Israel will not do anything that it feels will jeapordize its security.

That Israel will not undermine its own security is a debatable point to say the least, given, for example, Sharon’s withdrawal from Gaza, or even from Lebanon These are arguments that I do not endorse, but that I understand are being made.
.
But if it were incontestably the case that Israel will never consciously act against even its short term security interests, then the obvious question would be “Would a cessation of US military aid have significant negative impact on Israel’s security interests?”
.
Either it would, in which case Israel could then be expected to compromise its position with respect to settlements, or it wouldn’t, in which case it seems clear that we’re not being terribly efficient with our funds!
.
If Israel were not forced to reconsider abandoning the program of settlement of occupied territory should we withhold billions of dollars with which it supports its outsized (relative to the region) military, then our aid must not be terribly worth giving, correct?
.
Taking your estimation of Israel’s sensitivity to security concerns literally, if this military aid weren’t just a program of complete waste, fraud and abuse, then Israel would necessarily need to assume a more conciliatory posture with respect to settlements, wouldn’t it? It would seem that the most effective persuasive technique the United States could possibly employ would be the withholding of military aid to a government that was so threatened, is it not the case?
.
If what you are saying is true (and that 3 billion dollars annually isn’t a shocking waste of US taxpayer dollars), then surely Israel would be forced to come to the negotiating table having made productive concessions –their security would depend on it, wouldn’t it?
.
Thanks so much for helping me understand your perspective, mrein.

Honestly, both of you –mrein and neorationalist86– if you are Americans, can’t you expect of yourselves to be a little more objective when it comes to the decades-long, violent intransigence of foreigners?
.
This is the counsel of US President George Washington (link

…nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.
.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government“.

This is worth repeating:
.
“nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded”
.
We need not endlessly argue the merits of both sides in a foreign dispute, needn’t we?
.
We didn’t do so with respect to the Protestant and Catholics in Northern Ireland, aren’t I correct?
.
Please, you would do me the greatest of favors as a fellow American if you both would use your considerable intellects in more productive (for our country) pursuits.
.
Thanks so much for reading and considering this.

Sorry, LOL, reading the words of George Washington has apparently moved me to error.
.
That should be “amn’t I correct?“

Stuart~
While I understand your sentiments, and I am confident that the wisdom of George Washington could benefit the US government, individuals, especially Americans, will inevitably be bound to one or another foreign people, culture, or country. What is an American? We have no ethnicity. We have a profound lack of commonality. What are we but divisions? I, for example, am inextricably attached to Italy, its people (my people), its culture, and its language. But I also have family members from Lebanon and from Gaza. I am vehemently opposed to the expansionist excesses that have oppressed their people, their lineage, their culture; this leads to an irrevocable and impassioned disdain towards the government of Israel. Personal attachments are unavoidable, Stuart. They guide us and influence us in ways we cannot avoid.
~
And, I would add that for the US government to extricate itself from attachments, for example to Israel, as per the recommendation of President Washington, it would first require an honest discussion on what is occurring under Israel’s auspices, yes? Where better to start than among the informed citizenry?

I agree 100%. Just a long review for a little clarity. They act like they are the most powerful country in the world so they can take care of themselves for a while. I just roll my eyes when I see a leader from Israel on the WH calendar–just wasted time. Our dear leader from Israel has come to tell the Arab in the WH what he must do. They actually call the Prez “that Arab” often in their local newspapers. Or also the “N” word Arab, in comments. Very disrespectful.

Withhold aid? You can’t possibly be serious.

The left overstates the value of this political tactic and ignores the cost. Leave aside the fact it would generate outrage among sane Americans that we try to extort concessions out of the regions only democracy, and have an economic cost to US defense businesses, the aid isn’t as sgnificant as you think.

It represents less than 1.5% of Israeli GDP which until this recession had been growing at it’s fastest sustained rate in decades. The Israeli economy was booming, and will resume booming. It does represent as much as 25% of it’s defense budget however GWB left Israel sated with arms and others would be more than happy to fill the void.

Germany for example just delivered two brand new dolphin class submarines to Israel at bargin prices. Russia would be thrilled to replace the USA especially at the opportunity to do some technology sharing. Israel has better technology to Russia. The problem here isn’t Russian willingness to sell but Israel’s willingness to buy. Russia’s stuff is far from top quality. As far as the money, loans would be ideal. Israel’s GDP is in the neighborhood of $200B and was growing near 6% on booming trade. That’s an increase of $12B per year. Israel could easily arrange for interest free loans.

But forget Russia. France, Germany, the UK and India are more likely partners. Each would be thrilled to have the business and be quite generous on terms.

Note that Israel isn’t under threat by another govt or govt sponsored army. They are now more than adequately stockpiled. They could handle another Gaza and Southern Lebanon. If in fact Obama were to cut aid to Israel and that action incented an attack, especially by an arab govt, Obama would face impeachment hearings. It would at a minimum risk political disaster.

There is a reason only left wing lugnuts suggest cutting this aid and no WH will dare mention it. Joe is venting. That should be expected. Israel has been ignoring all suggestions from the left since the Camp David debacle. The problem isn’t they’ve moved so far right. The problem is it’s been so successful.

Obama followed the advice of Joe and the left in insisting on no settlements. It was bonehead stupid. We see the results. It had no chance of success. He’s infuriated the Israeli people and by changing that policy has now infuriated the Palestinian people. This has enabled BiBi to do his BiBI-as-Gandhi act (great phrase Joe!) with no risk of actual negotiations because Abbas is frozen politically. Netanyahu has run a cllnic on Obama (and Joe) while Obama has shredded his own credibility.

I’d compare Obama to Jimmy Carter for his ineptitude but that’s not fair to Jimmy Carter.

“No right of Palestinain return to Israeli areas, although there is the possibility of negotiating reparations for those Palestinians who were driven off their land in 1948.”

The Palestnians were not driven off their land by jews. They left were forced off by Arabs. The number of Jews living outside Israel were larger and they were forced off their lands. Whatever compensation is given to the Palestinians should then be exceeded by the compensation given to the Jews. That’s if this is about justice rather than bribery.

“I favor this deal. So did George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton”.

All generous with other peoples money. That said if it really bought peace it might be ‘cheaper’ in the lng run. We are a long ways away. There will not be any peace with Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran active in the region. Liberals refuse to deal with the elephant in the room. BiBi will continue with his Gandhi act and nullify Obama. Obama is standing in a hole he dug himself and he’s still holding a shovel.

…extort concessions…
Also known as demanding adherence to basic international law and humanitarian norms. Occupation is illegal, as per the 4th Geneva Convention; acquisition of territory through military force is illegal, as per the UN Charter and the Geneva Convention; settlements outside of Israeli borders are illegal, as per 4th Geneva Convention; arbitrary detentions and restriction of movement violate the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights; 1400 dead Palestinians in three weeks of Operation Cast Lead violates the principle of distinction between civilian and military targets and is a gross use of excessive force in violation of proportionality. Your affinity for one of the word’s worst human rights violators is illustrative of your moral decrepitude.
~
…There is a reason only left wing lugnuts suggest cutting this aid and no WH will dare mention it…
Actually, George H. W. Bush proposed a complete ban on aid to Israel while VP under Reagan. He was overruled. As President, G.H.W. Bush called a press-conference in response to Israel’s demands for loans for more settlements on the eve of the Madrid Peace Conference. President Bush harshly derided Israeli arrogance and questioned why they receive $3 billion in aid while we send troops to the region to die to protect them. President Bush went on to explain that Israeli hawks would subvert peace discussions by building more illegal settlements on Palestinian lands during major international peace talks. Following this, AIPAC pressured Congress who subsequently sent a harsh letter to Bush demanding a retraction.
~
President George W. Bush in 2002 took a hostile position towards the self-righteous, arrogant sense of entitlement of Ariel Sharon. President Bush discussed the US goal of eliminating settlements. AIPAC again called Congress who sent a letter to Bush demanding a public espousal of our irrevocable alliance with Israel.
.
Why? Why would Congress feel the need to declare our loyalty to a foreign power? Why were these right-wing Presidents, rdw56, so clear-headed and opposed to Israeli intransigence when you so suggest that only left-wing nuts oppose Israel?
.
Why is the 2003 Roadmap for Peace, authored by President Bush, with backing by the Middle East Quartet, quite possibly the most fair peace proposal offered in 60 years? It was by a Republican, rdw56. The Roadmap for Peace demands the removal of illegal settlements in West Bank, an end to occupation, respect for international law, dignity for Palestinians, a Palestinian state, etc, etc. It flies in the face of Israel’s expansionist goals, yet is was authored by a conservative Republican. I am truly sorry to tell you this, but conservatives have traditionally been far more harsh on Israel than the American left, which is, not coincidentally, home to the majority of Jewish Americans.

“Occupation is illegal, as per the 4th Geneva Convention;”

So is lobbing shells into Israel and walking into pizzaria’s and blowing up jewish babies. You clearly do not understand proportionality, A concept that’s been discussed and defined for over 100 years. It’s not eye for an eye or you take one of mine, I take one of yours. It is is you lob shells toward our schools we are entitled to do whatever is necessary to stop you from lobbying shells. Ergo Gaza was entirely proportional.

Look, we can argue the past forever but it doesn’t matter. Each side has it’s history. What to do to make tomorrow better is what matters. Jews have been building settlements for 30 years and negotiating with the Palestinians. Virtually all of the construction is on land Palestine has already conceded will be swapped to create a land bridge to Gaza. Even if tha wasn’t so, all it means is Abbas will get land back with professionally constructed buildings on it. Land more valuable than it otherwise would have been. Obama’s move was beyond naive. It was bonehead stupid so much so it wasn’t 6 months and he bailed out. Tnis man of supreme arrogance had to humiliate himself and leave Abbas in an impossible political posiiton.

There will not be peace in the Middle East until Arabs accept Israel’s right to exist and renounce terror. Then they can negotiate for real. This is posturing.

..

” I am truly sorry to tell you this, but conservatives have traditionally been far more harsh on Israel than the American left, which is, not coincidentally, home to the majority of Jewish Americans.”

Why would you be sorry? 1st GHWB was a moderate republican and not a conservative. There’s a difference. 2nd my support for Israel isn’t based on their perfection. They are no more perfect than Americans or anyone else. Republicans/conservatives can push Israeli harder, when necessary, for the same reason Nixon could go to China. Conservatives do not appease, apologize or grovel. GHWB pushed very hard. His threats were real and that aid far more of an issue in 1990 than 2009.

I would not describe the American left as hard on Israel. They have been soft/weak in the region. I think Bill Clinton an authentically brilliant man. What made him think Arafat wanted peace? He was hard on Israel but not as hard as GHWB and he wasn’t hard on Arafat. Arafat played him like a drum. Oslo wasn’t the result of Clintons diplomacy. He didn’t even know the jews and palestnians were talking.

As far as American jews being on the left that’s always been true and always been irrelevent. Israel has the staunch support of conservatives because we are pro-democracy, pro-rule-of-law, and extremely anti-terror. Israel receives broader and deeper support from Christians and other conservatives, and, always will.

What the american left has not grasped is both Israel and America have moved right since GHWB and especially since 9/11 and Israel has evoloved significantly since Sharon. Besides constructing the fence and pulling out of Gaza Sharon revitalized the economy. Israel has emerged as a very dynamic, very high-tech economy with trade agreements all over the world. They are so much further advanced economically and technologically since 1990. Israel has more companies listed on the NASD than any other country. 9/11 put a premium on security and counter-insurgency and who is better positioned than Israel to take advantage economically.

This is why cutting aid isn’t a serious issue. It’s less than 1.5% of Israeli GDP. Since Sharon Israel has been growing > 3x’s the rate of the EU-3 and will soon pass then in per capita GDP and zoom right past as Ireland did. France, the UK, Germany, Indian, Russia and China would be more that happy to supply Israel on generous terms. It’s not the same quality as ours but they’re not fighting us.

That doesn’t begin to address the domestic poliitcal risk if Obama did this or even made the threat.

.

“It flies in the face of Israel’s expansionist goals, yet is was authored by a conservative Republican.”

The roadmap and Israel are not expansionist. The land swap is designed to make Israel safer, not larger.

What you want to watch are the economic changes because money drives everything. Obama can’t see the forest for the trees. He’s no longer relevent. BiBi has run a clinic on him and Abbas can’t trust him.

Watch BiBi hold Obama in stasis as he babbles the clock away and BiBi works with Abbas and the Arab govts to invest in a more prosperous West Bank. Not Gaza as long as Hamas is there. Per capita incomes in the West Bank are going to soar relative to Gaza and in a short time, created a very different society.

I think it was the NYTs who reported they expect GDP growth of 7% this year. Israel has been talking down roadblocks and other economic impediments and working with the arab govts to invest their money and expertise in the West Bank. Qatar is expected to invest significantly in settlement construction for Palestinians. They will essentially be building small cities around a business model capable of supporting the population.,The construction itself is a major jobs program. The key is control of the money will be with Qatar and not the PLO.

Palestinians are well educated hard working people expected to flourish in any environment where there’s a reasonably functioning rule of law and authentic business oportunities.

The Arab govts see Iran and their terror proxies as the main threat. It is to their advantage to see the West Bank Palestinians make peace and start produding wealth rather than more terror. Qatar for one has the money, expertise and the incentive.

Abbas has been quite clear he’s comfortable in Ramallah, one of the most beautiful cities in the Arab world. He understands Hamas would kill him and all of Fatah in a heartbeat. Israel has been keeping him safe. All of this investment brings increased wealth and security.

Israel also gets more trade and security. They are not hurling rockets from the West Bank. Word is Fatah provided intelligent to Israel in Gaza. Cooperation and peace are good things.

With a propserous and peaceful West Bank Israel can more easily deal with Gaza and Southern Lebanon.

Consider these numbers and propserity. Israel has the capacity to grow 6%% to 8% on a sustaint basis. Their GDP is a little over $200M or near $30K per person. Well at 6% it grows to $252B in 4 years. That’s $52B in new business. Still think that $3B in aid is critical. Per Capita incomes would grow to near $38K and probably 10% higher than the EU-3.

Israel under Sharon did extremely well. Defense spending since 2000 has fallen from over 9% to near 7% of GDP. If the economy grows at 6% Israel can increase defense spending at the inflation rate or higher while lowering defense spending as a percent of GDP. It’s a win/win. It allows lower taxes and in turn even more growth. My understanding is BiBi expects to lower defense spending as a percent of GDP 1/4% per year to eventually get to 5%. Of course at the same time their defense industry is exploding. So spending on defense R&D will still increase. .

When you take a step back and look at what Sharon started and Netanyahu is continuing, with GWBs full support, you have to be impressed. They have made time their friend.

It’s to his advantage to get Obama and the left tied up in their silly ‘processes’ and can do little damage while they invest in their own economy and work with the peaceful arab govts to develop the West Bank. I only ran those numbers 4 years. Run them 8 years and you’ll be astonished. At current rates Israeli’s will hit $50K in per capita incomes before the French and German hit $40K. That’s a 20% gap that will continue to compound at increasing rates.

Liberals have a tendency to ignore business and economics. In the long run it drives everything. A more interesting question here is what happens to the population in the West Bank relative to Gaza. Hamas is far more religiously oppressive. So in addition to a great economic disparity lifestyles are likely to evolve very differently. Given Hamas and Fatah are in a civil war it’s had to see how Palestine forms into a single state to make a two-state solution possible. Why would propserous, secularized West Bankers want to be ruled by backwards Hamas?

rdw56~
Hamas renounced suicide bombing in 2005. Was it an abhorrent tactic? Absolutely! Does it warrant punishing the entire population of Gaza 4 years after the fact? Absolutely not! Lebanon 2006? 1000 Lebanese killed, the majority civilian. Gaza 2009, 1400 Palestinian killed, 5000 wounded. The rockets that you so despise, katyushas. are relatively harmless. Thousand were fired during Operation Cast Lead and 3 Israeli civilian were killed. Might I add, Israel violated the ceasefire on November 4th, 2008. From June to November, Hamas fired ZERO rockets! Operation Cast Lead was not in response to Hamas aggression, get that straight. Israel initiated a violation of the ceasefire by an airstrike within Gaza. Then it invaded when Hamas responded to the provocation by resuming rocket fire.
~
http://theinternationalonline.com/articles/97-un-human-rights-council-passes-resolution

I am conservative and I abhor the Israeli government. Fundamentalist Christians support Israel because of a perverted theological notion that Christ will come again to the Holy Land at a time when Jews control the region. Their support of Israel has nothing to do with affinity towards the Jewish people, it is based upon a belief that Jews will be in control upon the arrival of the Messiah and they will subsequently be purged. It’s actually a quite disturbing position and certainly underhanded support.
~
As for Israel’s commitment to democracy, the rule of law, and counter-terror, nothing could be further from reality. The paradox of a Jewish democracy is that you cannot have democracy while simultaneously preserving a Jewish nationality. Hence the second-class status of Israeli-Arabs. The rule of law? How can Israel be committed to such while continually violating international law and basic tenets of human rights? Israel’s existence in the West Bank is illicit. There is no rule of law, only Israeli intransigence. Anti-terror? Is occupation not a form of terror which specifically targets the civilian populace. Your lofty idealism with regard to Israel is misguided, and in fact, erroneous. The principles which you claim to support are in direct opposition to Israel’s official policies.

Israel is expansionist. Look at a map of the 1947 Partition Plan. Now look at a map of contemporary Israel. Israel has expanded three times her original size in 60 years of occupation, aggression, and annexation. The Roadmap, on the other hand, is fair and favors a just solution which ensures Palestinian dignity.
~
Sharon did not favor peace. His pull-out from Gaza followed 40 years of brutal occupation that essentially ensured the unsustainability of the Gaza Strip. Israel only pulled out when there was no chance of a functioning entity within Gaza. Furthermore, the pull-out was directly followed by an increase in settlement construction in the West Bank and an increased number of Jewish settlers. Gaza was a distraction from an escalation of illegal activity in West Bank. While you, and many others, were pointing at Gaza proclaiming Israel’s commitment to peace, Israel was quietly initiating part II of its diabolical plan to destabilize the Palestinian territories.
~
You callously justify the illegal transfer of civilians and infrastructure into the Occupied Territory of the West Bank by claiming that it strengthens the infrastructure of the West Bank. First of all, the billions that Israel has spent on Jewish only infrastructure in the Palestinian territory in no way benefits Palestinians, in fact it harms them in that it deprives them of their resources and land. Secondly, the admissibility of these settlements is clearly illegal, as per the 4th Geneva Convention, regardless of any delusional arguments of structural improvement in the territories. You defend the indefensible, sir. You are nothing more than an Israeli apologist, hell-bent on painting a caricature of that which is untrue. Israel is a blight on the Palestinian people, an incessant provocation that has squandered the dignity of the Palestinian people, and illicit entity that contravenes the basic notion of law and morality.
.
“The question is not whether, by a declaration of [apartheid/occupation,] we should declare something which is not. But rather whether we should declare as fact, something that already exists.” Benjamin Franklin

[...] blunt premises to their logical conclusions, Time’s Joe Klein is willing do so, as this is what he wrote earlier this week about what the Obama administration should do in the face of Israeli recalcitrance [...]

Hamas can renounce anything but firing rockets into Israel, no matter how imcompetently, is pure terrorism. They were warned to stop attacking Israel and did not. Proportionality allows one to take the actions necessary to end the acts of war.

Hamas has not renounced terrorism or it’s promise to wipe Israel off the map. They are a terrorist organization properly reviled by all sane people. They are also going to lose.

It’s impossible to predict the future but I expect they will taunt Israel again and there will be another war. This time they will have better Iranian rockets and reach further into Israel. This time Israel wil react more quickly and end Hamas. I believe they’re so devastate Hamas they’ll invite Fatah in to re-establish order and recreate a single Palestinian state. What remains of Hamas will be exterminated.

The law of unintended consequences is biting terrorists on the ass. The US military-industrial complex is rapidly advancing the science of war and Israel will benefit relative to it’s enemies.

“ensured the unsustainability of the Gaza Strip.”

I see no reason why Gaza is not a prosperous region. Before 1993 there was no fence and free movement between Gaza and Israel. My Jews visited Gaza regularly to eat in the resturants and sit on the beaches. There is no reason why Gaza can’t flourish.

Many of the settlements Israel vacated including the businesses were intentionally destroyed by the Palestinians. Gaza has become a UN ghetto because that’s what they choose to become.

“. First of all, the billions that Israel has spent on Jewish only infrastructure in the Palestinian territory in no way benefits Palestinians, in fact it harms them in that it deprives them of their resources and land. ”

I think you misunderstand the premise. What is to come regarding settlements in the WEst Bank is investment by other arab govts in cooperation with Israel in Palestinian settlements in the West Bank.

Netanyahu has no desire to remain in the West Bank forever. He hopes to make the West Bank self-sufficient economically to provide Palestinians a clear option between prosperity or misery.

My understanding of the framework and the two near agreements is that Israel and Palestine will end up with the same amount of land as in 1967 but about 6% will have been swapped so Israel keeps it’s settlements and more defensible borders. The West Band and Gaza will be connected via a land bridge. To the extent some land is more valuable there will be compensation. Palestine will get East jerusalem and full acess to it’s Holy Sites. Israel, I’ve read, has already reached agreements on a number of sites for major developments in the West Bank for Palestinians. Phase one of one settlement will have > 10,000 homes.

Once upon a time, before Oslo, there were no fences, no infatada, no suicide bombers and no rockets. Many Palestinians worked in Israel.

At some point Hamas and it’s supporters will give up and renounce terrorism and acknowledge Israelis right to exist as a jewish state within it’s 67 borders. Until that time Israel will do what it does best. Fight for it’s existance.

BTW: The elephant in the room is Iran. The Arabs fear Iran most of all. If in fact Iran keeps after Israel and threatens them with nuclear annihilation I do think Israel will attack Iran. Worse would be if Iran stops making threats but manages to get the bomb and uses it. Israel has 5 dolphin class subs and up to 200 nuclear warhears. Iran attacks Israel with a bomb I’d expect Israel to take out Iran and kill tens of millions. I am shocked the left isn’t focused on this issue.

“I am conservative and I abhor the Israeli government. Fundamentalist Christians support Israel because of a perverted theological notion that Christ will come again to the Holy Land at a time when Jews control the region.”

You are a rarity among Conservatives who love liberty and democracy. Israel is the only democracy in the region. This isn’t hard. Conservatives detest dictatorships.

Conservatives also support the rule of law and detest terrorism. The infatada and the move to go on school buses and blow up little jewish girls was contemptable. Ergo, conservstives hold Hamas and the PLO in contempt. I also think you are wrong on your thing about evangelicals but even if you are right that’s just one more factor.

No self-respecting conservative would consider giving any terrorist organization a seat at the table until AFTER they renounced all terrorism. This was true before 9/11, Moreso after. It’s only common sense. Reward a behavoir and you get more of it.

Joe was venting as he often does. Obama is not gong to hold Israeli aid. It’s not a viable risk/reward option. It carries a great deal of political risk.

If for example Obama were to freeze aid and then Hamas or Hezbollah or both decided to start firing rockets Obama would be blamed. At a minimum it would be deeply unpopular on the right an among independents to begin with.

And what does Joe seek to gain? GWB and Israel knew Obama was not friendly toward Israel. They are well supplied and armed. A 3 month freeze on aid means the US defense industry will have a weaker Qtr. Israel’s stockpile won’t shrink unless it does incent war. In the short term there would be no effect on Israel and in the long term Israel would replace the US with France and Britian instead.

It isn’t liike Israel is going to war with a technologically advanced foe and Israel has a world class arms industry.

There is a reason why people in power don’t make such threats in public as Joe has. He can be foolish and it doesn’t matter.

RDW56~~
.
[Hamas was] warned to stop attacking Israel and did not. Proportionality allows one to take the actions necessary to end the acts of war.
Incorrect. The June 2008 ceasefire hinged on three facets: Hamas would cease rocket attacks, Israel would not attack targets within Gaza, and Israel would lift the blockade (sea, air, and land) of Gaza. Hamas did not fire any rockets between June and November. Israel’s blockade (an act of war) was not lifted. Israel fired a missile into Gaza on November 4th, killing 12 members of Hamas. Israel violated the ceasefire. Proportionality allows one (Hamas) to take the action (resume rocket attacks) to end the acts of war (Israeli blockade, Israeli airstrike). By your own accord, you agree that Hamas was justified, Israel was not.
~~
Gaza has become a UN ghetto because that’s what they choose to become.
Incorrect. Gaza has become a ghetto because of an oppressive Israeli blockade ( a perpetual state of war). According to the Israeli human rights group, B’Tselem, the extent of the blockade: Israeli control of airspace, territorial water, control over trade, control of borders, rationing of electricity and water, limitation on international aid deliveries, supersonic booms, population registry, arbitrary arrests and detentions, and taxation. The destitution within Gaza is a direct result of Israel’s heavy-handed isolation of Gaza.
~~
Netanyahu has no desire to remain in the West Bank forever. He hopes to make the West Bank self-sufficient economically to provide Palestinians a clear option between prosperity or misery.
That’s your take. It’s highly debatable. The billions of dollars invested in Jewish only settlements will not be relinquished without a fight. 500,000 illegal Israeli settlers live on Palestinian lands. Will Israel forcibly pull these half a million Israelis out? It’s an impossibility. Israel’s intention is to solidify its grip on the thousands of settlements so that they may ultimately annex and absorb these lands into Israel.
~~
You are a rarity among Conservatives who love liberty and democracy. Conservatives also support the rule of law and detest terrorism.
Precisely, that is why I cannot in good conscience support Israel. There is no rule of law in Israel’s dealings with the Palestinians. Israeli policies are aimed specifically at a civilian population, therefore it is Israel who terrorizes its enemies. Israel is an expansionist human rights violator that employs the use of humiliation and terrorism to oppress its neighbors, all the while employing an expert propaganda machine to convince people such as you that this is all merely an honorable defense to relatively harmless rocket attacks. Israel is the historical aggressor. It was born out of Jewish terrorism by Stern Gang, Haganah, and Irgun. Its nascent actions were terrorism, pure and simple, yet they are lauded as freedom-fighting efforts today by PM Netanyahu. The same 1940′s Jewish actions that he heralds are what he characterizes as Palestinian terrorism today. Israel is an immoral hypocrisy.

“Israel’s intention is to solidify its grip on the thousands of settlements so that they may ultimately annex and absorb these lands into Israel”

All of the 30,000 settlements now under cnstruction are on lands Israel expects to keep under previously negotiated land swaps. The sense I’ve gotten from many people including Clintonista’s are the land swaps were not highly contested. There’s general agreement they will never return to 67 borders and the suggested borders are proably 99% of the way they’ll eventuallly agree to..

Israel has already evicted settlers from non-approved and approved settlements. Ariel Sharon had to form a new party to make it happen in Gaza. There’s no question Israel will walk away from settlements.

My understanding of the hardest issue is Jerusalem and right of return and everyone knows how they will end as well.

Abbas isn’t worried at the Israeli guns pointed at him. He is worried about the Iranian guns pointed at his back.

Thomas L Friedman finally bought a clue today suggesting the USA walk away because the process is a sham, Well it’s always been so. But for once most of the Arab states are in agreement on a positive way forward thanks in large part to their fears of Iran and terrorism turned against them.

The key is the West Bank developing the institutions of statehood with the rule law and a sound economy. Netanyahu is trying to see they do. Before we know it they’ll have had > 5 years of sustain peace and prosperity and be visibly further evolved than Gaza.

Once it’s clear in Gaza they can only continue to lose to Israel and risk the strong possibility that upon being defeated by Israel Fatah will assume control they will start to work towards a real peace. Hamas will not survive a Fatah return.

Obama’s polls in Israel are in the single digits. The aid represents less than 1.5% of Israeli GDP and is used almost entirely to buy American arms. Israel was very well supplied by Bush.. The loss of the aid would have no visible impact unless Israel were to go into a major war and need to be resupplied and that would take some time. Hamas isn’t in a position to take another savage beating.

Politically it would be far more damaging to Obama than Netanyaghu

So, you are of the opinion that peace, any peace, is superior to justice and accountability? It bothers you not in the slightest that any settlements that Israel annexes, regardless of whether there is capitulation on this point by Palestinians, will have been lands rightfully owed to the Palestinians? If, by way of years upon years of occupation, Palestinians finally cave and accede to Israel on the issue of settlements you find that to be desirable to the international community pressing Israel to return lands illegally occupied? So, does the rule of law mean nothing to you? You glossed over any and all Israeli culpability in 60 years of violence and aggression, continually reverting to the tired assertions of Hamas as the sole problem. In case you were unaware, Israel backed the emergence of Hamas, rationalizing her rise as an important destabilizing factor upon the secular PLO, with whom Israel was having increasing difficulties taming. Israel continually financed and gave building permits for Hamas infrastructure in Gaza, intentionally hoping to divide the Palestinians. Israel has NO desire for peace. When will you realize this. It’s entirely about control, it’s a simple divide and conquer stratagem. Now Israel has turned its support to Fatah to destabilize Hamas. It’s an endless cycle of duplicitous posturing.

[...] Kein wrote the US “should start putting a hold on all economic and military aid to Israel … until the [...]

“It’s an endless cycle of duplicitous posturing.”

Prospects for everlasting peace are looking as good as ever , I see . . . . .

“I think it was the NYTs who reported they expect GDP growth of 7% this year.”

So that’s where all the money went . . . . short selling peace.

“Netanyahu has no desire to remain in the West Bank forever. He hopes to make the West Bank self-sufficient economically to provide Palestinians a clear option between prosperity or misery.”

I doubt that.

“Bibi would face a vote of no confidence so fast he would still be gasping for breath as the door hit him on the way out. Not sure if the fallout would leave Livni as PM or not, but it would be interesting.”

Perhaps he could emigrate to America and run for office as the Republican member for GE.

“I said “neighboring countries, ” not non-state actors, such as Hamas and Hezbollah.”

You say potato…..

“It was born out of Jewish terrorism by Stern Gang, Haganah, and Irgun. Its nascent actions were terrorism, pure and simple, yet they are lauded as freedom-fighting efforts today by PM Netanyahu.”

I say Pohtaytow.

There won’t be peace without justice and accountability. The settlements are not impediments to peace. The 67 borders are no longer operational. There will be land swaps such that Palestine has the same amount of land it had before.

There was a war and the Arabs lost. There are consequences to war. Ask Mexico. Better yet, look at Islamic history.

As far as Hamas and Fatah it’s an issue for Palestinians to settle and it’s been egregiously bloody. During the war in Gaza Hamas murdered as many as 50 suspected members of Fatah at times dragging them in the street for a public execution.

Talk of a two state solution is somewhat absurb when Palestine is already two states isn’t it? It’s not only smart but moral for Netanyahu to play one against the other. The West Bank has generally been calm and cooperative as their common ground has provided common cause. A variation of the ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend” theme.

Israel wants no parts of running Palesitne. There has to be a winner between Fatah and Hamas. Fatah lost the elections in Gaza and now they’re mostly dead. Netanyahu is betting Hamas can win and would be the partner for peace. He’s tryng to build the institutions needed for a functioning state, with USA assistance, and hoping after a time West Bank Palestinians decide they’ve had enough.

Hamas has no intention of making peace. They could hardly be clearer. The best result here for Israel is Fatah eliminates Hamas and brings Gaza together with the West Bank and negotiates a peace for both.

The time line is probably at least 5 years. The impotantt thing is Israel continue to use time to it’s advantage and to get the WB to start booming economically to separate fully from Gaza.

[...] Klein says it’s time for the Obama administration to play some hard ball with the Israeli government of Benjamin [...]

I don’t think it’s just the Likudniks that would not accept Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state. I would be surprised if any Israeli outside the peace camp (a third or less of the population) would accept Jerusalem as anything but the capital of Israel. Dividing Jerusalem would mean war, I guarantee.

It is naive to say that Barak offered Arafat the moon and Arafat threw it in his face. That is just the official line.

And to imagine that a bullying murderer like Ariel Sharon would be kind enough to make real efforts toward peace is a joke.

Otherwise, I agree with your analysis. If they do not make real moves toward peace, screw ‘em.

[...] Walt notes that Joe Klein has written a similar post at Time with the addendum that the U.S. should temporarily withhold aid to Israel in [...]

Mr. Klein seems to have little use for facts in his rant. He accused Netanyahu of building ‘new settlements’ on ‘Palestinian land’ in East Jerusalem. Netanyahu isn’t building any new ‘settlements’ in East Jerusalem!!! He just happens to be Prime Minister, PM, when the court made their final determinations in a property case they have been hearing for years.

Israel is a democracy and the PMs powers are not absolute. The PM is subject to the law. A PM cannot dictate a whim then it’s immediately enforced.
A PM can no more unilaterally stop or start construction in East Jerusalem than they can in Tel Aviv. A PM can not overturn a court decision.

The land in East Jerusalem was not Palestinian land! It was seized by Jordan in 1948 from Jewish landowners, as was the rest of that area, and Arabs were settled there. These matters are now being resolved in the courts. Jerusalem prior to Jordanian occupation was Jewish majority city both east and west.

Joe, great article, right on the money.

The U.S. should immediately stop all financial and military aid to Israel. Israel must be isolated and brought to account for its numerous war crimes and violations of international law.

Jimmy Carter did it once when Israel made an unwarranted invasion of Lebanon. He notified the prime minister of Israel at the time that this violated US law, in that US sale of weapons to Israel was predicated on Israel using the weapons for defensive purposes only. This is US law and was then too. They withdrew from Lebanon under that pressure.

George H.W. Bush forced a showdown with Yitzhak Shamir over Israel’s West Bank settlements by threatening to link $10 billion in loan guarantees to Israel’s compliance with a settlement freeze.

All Obama has to do is cut, or let’s say ‘review’ their aid.

Bring in legislation to ban all bilateral trade with Israel until its government complies with international law, the UNSC and the Geneva Conventions.

Or, link settlement building or settlement evacuations to the loans, loan guarantees, and military aid packages.

Israel has no problems with waging war in Lebanon and Gaza and killing thousands is finding it “difficult” to evacuate outposts?Ridiculous.

As long as the Israelis pay no price for the occupation, the occupation will not end, and therefore the only way open to the opponents of the occupation is to take concrete means that will make the Israelis understand that the injustice they are perpetrating comes with a price tag.

It is a matter of record that Mahmoud Abbas participated in 18 years of direct negotiations with seven Israeli governments.

In which time the settlements and their associated infrastructure grew exponentially. What do the Israelis, Obama, and our useless congress want? That Abbas should allow settlements to grow for another 18 years?

Democracy? How? Israel is an apartheid, ethnocentric state that was founded on terrorism. it stands in direct violation of international law and countless UN resolutions.

The concept of a religious state is complete anathema to democracy. Any country that’s central identity is based on religious/ethnic discrimination is NOT a democracy.

Ask the Arab citizens of Israel if they consider it to be a democracy.

Israel was explicitly founded with terrorism as a Jewish state and citizenship is based on the principle of blood kinship. Given this, it is not surprising that its 1.3 million Arabs are treated as second-class citizens.

Your Israeli ‘democracy’ in action?

A nation (Israel) that rules its neighbor, it controls water, electric and all energy in Palestinian territories that are not theirs but they do colonize them.

A Nation that does not allow Palestians to leave or go abroad to study or work or anything.

A Nation that does not allow ANY visitors from outside Gaza to family members or elders or children.

A Nation that does not allow Palestinians to get access to their own water front, not for leisure nor for commerce with anyone in the globe.

A nation that has built miles and miles of roads and highways that can only be used by Israelis in territories that are NOT theirs.

A Nation that denies exit to any Gazan when war occurs, they can not flee.

A nation that does not let all its citizens vote.

Democracy my rear.

East J’lem is occupied land according to the UN, Fourth Geneva Convention, and international law.

Resolved in the courts? You mean Israeli courts? Where 99% of Palestinains loose their claims to their houses, land, villages?

According to your logic, it would be acceptable if a foreign group settle in Yellowstone National Park and deem it their own country just because nobody is living there. Its nothing but geysers and pine trees.

The Israelis have no legitimate claim to the land. Please stop with your revisionist BS and efforts to make the stink of Israels apartheid policies smell like roses.

Thanks for such cogent, powerful & courageous presentation of the issues.

But do we have a president willing to go mano a mano with Congress and the Israel lobby presuming he’s willing to suspend such aid? And wouldn’t Congress attempt to override a possible presidential veto of an Israel aid bill? I mean, don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see a president take on the lobby for a change. But given all of Obama’s other domestic issues, do we really think he’s “all in” for Israel-Palestine?

I know he made the right noises on this score during the campaign & since. But the amt. of capital he would have to expend to do the kinds of things Joe is advocating would be huge. The enemies he would make would be huge both in the lobby & Congress.

I’d like nothing more than to think that Obama has what it takes. But does he?

1) Netanyahu is not “irrendendist”. I’d note that Jordan renounced its claim to the territory. Furthermore, the Green Line is the pre-1967 ceasefire line, which was smaller than the original partition borders. When Israel lost territory, the world was silent. When they gained territory after a war the Arab states initiated, then so many are upset by that.

2) The Muslims are not being asked to share Mecca. They don’t even allow non-Muslims to set foot in there. Meanwhile, the Jordanians weren’t willing to allow Israel to have sovereignty over the Western Wall, didn’t even allow Jews to visit it, while under Israel Muslims control the Dome of the Rock and most of the Temple Mount.

3) Palestinians are the largest per capita recipients of aid in the world, but most of it is not from the US, so Friedman’s superficial solution of stopping aid to both sides not only wouldn’t accomplish anything, but is in fact disproportionally anti-Israel in effect. Not to mention it would also be a violation of the US’s treaty obligations under the Camp David agreements, which Israel has abided by.

4) The demand to halt “settlements” is unreasonable. Israel is not expanding the area of the settlements. Both Jews and Arabs are allowed to build on their own land in areas of Israeli control, both inside and outside the Green Line; Obama is asking Israel to discriminate against Jews by preventing them alone from building. Meanwhile, all Jews were long ago ethnically cleansed from the Arab areas, so Jews aren’t even allowed to live there, much less build.

[...] Two eminent mainstream journalists — Tom Friedman and Joe Klein — recently called for United States to disengage from the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, on the grounds that Palestinians were too divided to make a deal and the Israelis were not interested in one. Friedman couldn’t bring himself to draw the logical conclusion — if the United States truly going to “disengage,” that also means cutting off its economic and military assistance — but Klein did. [...]

[...] is having its death rattles (3 years of death rattles, unusual case doctor). Joe Klein wants sanctions. And here’s the Nation on the crumbling of the Palestinian Authority. It is unusual to read [...]

thanks Mr. Klein for the sober analysis in the mainstream media. Mrein is a Hasbara plant, who blames the Palestinians for their own dispossession. Peace without Justice is oppression. the idea that Palestinian refugees are a nuisance that must be swept under the rug, or symbolically appeased just shows the level of accepted racism from Israel.

yes to boycott, divestment, sanctions
no to racism.
no to Hebron Fund at Citi Field http://www.tinyurl.com/metsalert

Way to go Joe. US should definitely stop aid, grants and loans to Israel.

US should also stop selling Israel arms that they pay for with aid, grants and loans.

US is in the midst of the largest “defense” deal in Israel’s history. American F-35 stealth fighter jets. (defense = attack) http://bit.ly/lx7nU

No wonder the Arabs are enemies of the US – too much money and arms to Israel.

http://bit.ly/3rBBrZ

2007 $30 billion in military aid to Israel. The U.S. agreed to provide Israel with $30 billion in military aid over a ten year period. Israel received its first subsidy in 2008. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) used some of this aid in its December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009 assault against Gaza and is accused of committing war crimes.

twitter @jewbama

Mr. Klein -
I agree we should hold up all aid to Israel until Israel gets on board the peace train: It needs to end the settlements in the West Bank, end the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians out of East Jerusalem, realize the East Jerusalem will be the capital and economic heart of a viable Palestinian state, and end the illegal siege of Gaza. At $5 billion per year, Israeli intransigence is become just too expensive.

It might seem painful at first, but Israel will be better off in the end. Israelis now act like spoiled children: they are never held accountable for their actions and are able to engage in incredible destructive behavior: destructive of Palestinian human rights, gross violations of international law, and incredibly destructive of the future of peace and Israel’s own future. Some real tough love: limits and boundaries, will be essential for Israeli Jews and Palestinians alike.

[...] short. The horse is already out of the gate. Just a few weeks ago, Time’s superstar writer Joe Klein suggested that the best way to get Israel to stop its settlement project and share Jerusalem is “by putting a hold on all economic and military aid to Israel.” [...]

[...] administration doesn’t seem interested in taking on the pro-eviction lobby in Congress and suspending aid to Israel, which is the only thing likely to change Israeli [...]