Leon Hadar clarifies his position for me, which I seem to have misrepresented somewhat:
I'm all for Obama
getting involved and trying to impose a solution. In 1992 I published a article
in Foreign Policy magazine, America And Israel: Reforming Israel-Before It's Too
Late, which
applauded Bush I for pressing Israel on the issue of the settlements and the
Palestinians. And believe me that your pals at AIPAC didn't like it. And in
general my view is that the U.S. should take steps to "normalize" its
relationship with Israel (again, a piece I had in The Washington Post
in the early 1990's was titled: "The U.S. and Israel: Is it Divorce Time?"
) My recent piece in the WPJ is just an attempt to be real about what is going
to happen about the many constraints that are going to operate on the Obama
Administration. I'm a realist and try to tell people what I think is going to
happen as opposed to what should happen. (I think that Rashid Khalidi made
similar observation in a recent interview with Haaertz).
In fact, I published another piece
two days ago link to globalparadigms.blogspot.com "Obama
Should Take the Other Road to Jerusalem" which calls on him to embrace
an activist diplomatic approach. But at the end of
the day, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who will have to make a deal
and "de-internationalize" this (blip) conflict that is getting on everyone's
nerves. At times, it seems to me that Jewish peaceniks, not unlike the neocons,
derive some psychological and perhaps other rewards through their never-ending
peace processing, not unlike social workers whose career depends on the
perpetuation of poverty. It will be great if Obama makes it peace happen. But
even if he doesn't, I believe that the decline in American power is going to
lead to a gradual disengagement of the U.S. from the Middle East and indeed to a
more "normal" relationship with Israel. When that happens, many Israelis will
look with a certain nostalgia to the days of U.S. "pressure" as opposed to the
more benign neglect approach towards the Middle East that Washington will then
adopt (while the New York Times — if it will still be around — will
not be covering Israel as though it is a borough of New York City).
I am in complete agreement with Hadar. It is so painfully obvious that the peace process is a charade to cover the occupation of the West Bank. I suppose we should wait a bit to see if Obama is going to be serious about making something happen, but if not, then there is really only one thing that those of us in the US can do and that is to pressure our government to stop our de facto support for the expanding occupation. No more tax payer dollars to Israel.
Metaphor and Divination, I like it.
The goal is never to reach the destination. The journey IS the destination. A road map performs the dual function of indicating progress to the peons, and providing for the Project managers a clearer picture of the endless side roads and dirt tracks on which the peace train can be derailed if it picks up too much pace on the express route. The road map is like the purge; complete bullshit, another ignoble Straussian lie. And dlike the purge, it has worked like a charm.
'No more tax payer dollars to Israel.'
Good idea, one Christopher Ketcham had a while ago (no link – his blog, Habeus Corruptus, appears to be down). He advocated mass tax revolt to force the govt to cease payments to Israel and to draw down war funding, but how to do this? Here in Australia, most of us are on pay as you earn (PAYE) where employers take tax out on behalf of the govt – so far as I know we have no legal recourse to prevent or modify this, so the notion of a great opt-out is impossible.
These freedoms we keep fighting for do not include the freedom to withhold from the government our contribution to actions we deem immoral. That's one freedom I bet they don't hate us for.
They have us all over a barrel.
Totally agree with Hadar on this:
" I believe that the decline in American power is going to lead to a gradual disengagement of the U.S. from the Middle East and indeed to a more "normal" relationship with Israel. When that happens, many Israelis will look with a certain nostalgia to the days of U.S. "pressure" as opposed to the more benign neglect approach towards the Middle East that Washington will then adopt (while the New York Times — if it will still be around — will not be covering Israel as though it is a borough of New York City).
He is right ,that is exactly how it will happen.
Hadar btw, is a smart fellow….read his paper "The Green Peril"…about how the ME was set up as the US's next enemy..it was published way before the Iraq war and also describes how the ME countries will react and who will be using who and what each country will be doing in it's own interest…be it playing the US or using our agression for their own agenda. It's so acurate it could have written yesterday instead of years ago.
There is no decline in American power.
We have vast wealth. We will conquer Afghanistan like Iraq. Then we'll eventually conquer Iran.
We're pacing ourselves now. The Zionists can take care of Iran on their own too.
Arabs can't fight unfortunately.
No amount of dissent will change American foreign policy. Not with the usual apathy and day-to-day dramas we all have that take precedence over what our government and army do abroad.
It's the perfect license to kill.