Helena Cobban has published an amazing report on an interview she did with smiling senior Likud security-affairs specialist Efraim Inbar, who surely has Netanyahu's ear. Somewhat shocking. A lot of racism dignified as the "Zionist ethos." Incredible arrogance, which I (optimistically) regard as hubristic; he doesn't know what's coming in the revised American discourse.
Oh, and if you read nothing else, just read the last two sentences. It's all you need to know about Zionism. But don't tell the children:
I asked his assessment of the prospects for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. “The most important factor for us is not the Arabs, but the Americans,” he said. “And honestly, no-one there really believes in this. Even at Annapolis, in spite of all the fine rhetoric about concluding an agreement before the end of the year, in actual fact their only goal was a ‘shelf agreement’—that is, an agreement that could sit on a shelf for an indefinite length of time.
“The two-state solution is passé—because the Palestinians aren’t up to it. The only way it could work would be if two conditions were fulfilled: that the Palestinians should support it, which they don’t; and that the state would have a monopoly on the use of force, which the Palestinian Authority doesn’t have.”...
Regarding the Palestinian track, he noted that Netanyahu has started to try to sell the idea of an “economic peace.” I noted that this approach had been mooted and even halfheartedly tried before, by Netanyahu during his earlier premiership, 1996-99, and other Israeli leaders, and it had always proven not to be viable in the absence of any real progress in the diplomacy. Inbar’s immediate response was to declare forthrightly “We don’t care if it’s viable or not!”
He then said, “We can’t give up the West Bank because it’s too close to our heartland. Gaza—okay, because it’s further away from the heartland. But there, anyway, we saw the chaos and violence that ensued after we withdrew.”
“What we should do,” he argued, “is try to involve Egypt in running Gaza and Jordan in running the West Bank.” [John Bolton and other neocons are trying to sell this rug in the U.S., too]
The other members of the international community, he said baldly, “don’t count—even though in Europe there is now greater understanding of the shortcomings of the Palestinians than there was before… There is movement.”
Turning to the situation of the 1.5 million residents of Gaza, he referred to an article he had published in early February in which he argued that the international community should not do anything to help the rebuild the homes and public infrastructure that were so extensively destroyed by Israel during the recent war. In the article he argued that the international community should “not be drawn into sentimental escapades of rebuilding and humanitarian assistance that undercut our paramount strategic goals.”
...[H]e then commented with a smile that “Hamas is good for the Jews! As long as they are there it is a gift to us!”
He added, “I wouldn’t hesitate to make a wave of refugees out of Gaza. That would put pressure on Egypt to increase their presence inside the Gaza Strip. They should take over the whole Strip directly, or have their own puppet government there, be it Hamas or whoever.”
...I asked how he assessed the impact of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank on the peace process. “The settlements act as an incentive to the Palestinians to become more reasonable in the diplomacy,” he said. “And you know, that worked before Oslo. But since Oslo, well, their learning curve became very slow.”
But might not the Israeli government now start to face some pressure from the new US administration to stop the settlement-expansion program and to follow up on its previous undertakings to immediately remove those settlement outposts that even previous Israeli governments have deemed to be ‘illegal’?
He replied, “We may be pushed, yes. The Americans may push us some, so we’ll remove one or two outposts or one or two roadblocks. We’ll play with the Americans.”
So what were his expectations from the Obama administration, in general?
“Well, they are talking very differently from Bush. But they have so many other things to deal with! The economy, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran! How much energy will they have for this issue here?
“Most Israelis, you know, see their policy towards Iran as appeasement. So I hope Dennis Ross will come to the president after six months and tell Obama that there’s no deal to be had with Iran, so then Obama will be ready to get serious.”
But what about the mounting chorus of concern from the international community about the level of destruction in Gaza?
“We can take it! Jews have not always been popular in the world. And now, at the Durban review summit, we are being singled out once again.” (A chuckle here.)
His expectations from George Mitchell?
“Organizationally, it’s a clear problem, because Hillary has too many envoys. I don’t think he can do much good. But he’s American, so he’ll try. But what can he do? Can he change Abu Mazen? He might end up going along with Netanyahu’s plan an economic peace. He and the president probably don’t want a crisis in American-Israeli relations so soon.”
He sat back and grew expansive. “I’m a student of Albert Wohlstetter,” he said, referring to the University of Chicago strategic studies thinker at the University of Chicago who influenced many of the leading US neoconservatives. “But I’m not a neocon! I told Paul Wolfowitz and Bill Cristol, both of whom are my friends, that trying to bring democracy to the Middle East was a big mistake.
“Oh sure, yes, it was good to get rid of Saddam. He was a very bad guy. But they didn’t need to try to democratize the country, too.”
More on Obama: “I was concerned about him at the beginning, but most of his appointments seem to be mainstream. It’s a real tribute to the United States that you elected a black person. So let’s wait and see. Yes, I’m critical of some of his policies on, for example, Iran, but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt because we need a strong America.”
I asked his view of the emergence of hard rightwinger Avigdor Lieberman as a major force inside Israeli politics. He had an interesting analysis of the Lieberman phenomenon, noting—correctly—that along with many strongly rightwing views, Lieberman supported some of the causes of the left, including that he is not against the establishment of a Palestinian state.
He concluded by saying that Lieberman “is accepted by Israelis, even if he is not liked by some. Also, he has attracted some very prominent personalities to his party… I don’t like his tone; it’s not my cup of tea. But it’s acceptable in a democracy.”
RE:"The security cooperation with the Palestinians didn’t work, and we are unilateralists by nature anyway. This is the Zionist ethos. We are no longer dependent on the Gentiles.”
Now that's good to hear. Considering the economic state of the USA, and Israel's independence, can we
now cut off unconditional aid to Israel? And to Egypt too, since that aid is totally conditional on Egypt
rubber-stamping whatever Israel wants?
Anybody want to copy this statement to the Obama regime?
Should clear things up, and free up some money for the stimulus plan.
This guy provides some interesting and frank insider insights into Likud/Netanyahu thinking (and perhaps general off-the-record American Jewish Zionist thinking as well, at least when the cameras aren't rolling):
—
“Hamas is good for the Jews! As long as they are there it is a gift to us!”
“I wouldn’t hesitate to make a wave of refugees out of Gaza. That would put pressure on Egypt to increase their presence inside the Gaza Strip. They should take over the whole Strip directly, or have their own puppet government there, be it Hamas or whoever.”
"I hope Dennis Ross will come to the president after six months and tell Obama that there’s no deal to be had with Iran, so then Obama will be ready to get serious.”
"we don’t have a demographic burden in Golan. It’s clean of Arabs. It’s very beautiful."
—
So the question becomes: how much longer are Americans going to be willing to put up with advocates of institutional racism like this holding sway over our country via the Israel lobby? How much longer will the Democrats continue to take racist Jewish Zionist money by the boat load and use it to project Jewish Zionist racism across the Middle East? Will they cling to Jewish Zionist money and racism come hell, high water, or civil war, as they clung to slavery? Very likely…
"It's clean of Arabs, it's very beautiful…"
Perfect expression of the prevalent* israeli state of mind. The difference between Israelis and the typical American zionist is that to the former this is self-evident truth, while the latter would consider it a Freudian slip.
Been reading Helena Cobain's accounts from Ramallah. Makes a great series of companion pieces to Anna Balzer's tales. This particular interview deserves to be widely circulated. Such refreshing honesty!
___
* the sentence sounds even "better" in Hebrew, especially when spiced with references to "house cleaning' and "IDF as detergent" (not to be confused with 'deterrent'). it's what you hear in every taxi, from every shop-keeper, at every gathering. It's the sub-text to every news broadcast and social conversation. The expression is best delivered with a sigh, to convey 'what else can we do with all this trash…".
Helena Cobban can get them to open up like this because she is so good at pretending to be a human doormat. For instance, when he says "It’s a real tribute to the United States that you elected a black person," she doesn't correct his assumption that she is an American. In fact, she's British.
“Hamas is good for the Jews! As long as they are there it is a gift to us!”
That should have been “Hamas is good for the Zionists! As long as they are there it is a gift to us!”
Those critical of Israel have always understood that Palestinian terrorism is bad for its victims but good for Israel and Zionism. Now more than ever: Israel has joined the 'Global War on Terror' (by fighting Hamas??? lol) and that's a great umbrella of excuses for carrying out further colonisation.
Holy Crap!
Seriously, is this person for real? Is she widely read in, say, Israel and even amongst the Zionists here? Is this a credible piece?
I've always suspected this has been the viewpoint of the right wing Israeli's, but to have this set out in black and white is amazing. Truly amazing. I feel like I can read their minds — It's just so damn well creepy.
Noticed "Bill Cristol" was spelt wrong. It's supposed to be Kristol isn't it? Is this piece for real? Who is she?
LOL
This reminds me of a Garfield cartoon I had framed and put in my office.
Garfield's owner kept playing with him and teasing him, dangling strings in front of him to try and get him to chase them, treating the cat as a dumb play thing. In the final frame of the cartoon Garfield swats him across the room and says..'I am through playing".
Is it good for the Jews? A few peeps are asking, is it good for the N Americans? That's nice to see.
Zionism cannot be defined by one person, one idea, one interview, or one bomb landing on a family's house.
Zionism is Jewish self-determination. It is a GOOD.
Human rights should not supercede the fundamental right to ethnic nationalism.
Rejection is not a proposal. But wanton slaughter is.
Iran (through its unestablished, unproven link to Hamas) and Syria are aggressively PROVOKING Israel into war.
If Phil wants to contribute to PEACE, why does he have the word WAR in his title? If he wants justice, shouldn't he withhold his verdict until examining every last absurd claim of Jewish Zionist apologists with their heads completely in the sand?
Zionism is capable of changing its character. First, anti-Zionists must cease their criticism. Next, the U.S. must continue its unconditional aid. Only then is a solution possible.
Nineteenth and twentieth century European anti-Semitism is still a VALID JUSTIFICATION for brutal colonialism, wanton slaughter, and nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.
I haven't had to move to Israel yet, but I don't discount the possibility that Hitler might rise from the dead to install the Third Reich in the United States. In such a scenario, won't we all be glad that Israel exists?
So you may propose a Zionist endgame, but I still don't see it.
@ Gert: ' “Hamas is good for the Jews!…That should have been “Hamas is good for the Zionists!…
@ Sand: 'I've always suspected this has been the viewpoint of the right wing'
—
C'mon, this goes way beyond left and right; this goes to the racist Jewish Zionist state of mind (what Inbar called the unilateral Zionist nature and ethos) and racist Zionist networks, which exist from Hollywood to Wall Street to Washington to Tel Aviv to the ministry of John Hagee. If this was merely "right wing," then why do the Democrats take so much racist Jewish Zionist money? Why do they appoint so many racist Jewish Zionists to powerful positions and elect so many of them to the party and to positions of leadership?
The acceptance of slavery was beyond left and right as well, and went to a state of mind — a state of mind that still exists in many primitive parts of the world to this day, as well as in many primitive Western minds.
It's time to throw out the old left-right paradigm; it's far too static and has been exploited by demagogues for far too long, which is one of the reasons racist Jewish Zionists have been able to infiltrate American institutions to the degree they have. It's time to start dividing the world between those who are willing to accept the racist Jewish Zionist state of mind, and willing to enable and collaborate with it (which includes most of the two-party regime elite) and those who are not.
The former must be extracted from power. Having them in positions of "leadership" completely warps traditional Western norms, and thus warps traditional Western policy.
You missed the point. Two-state failed because Fateh used it as a springboard for war against Israel, which Inbar politely stated as "It never had the Palestinians' support" and "The [Palestinian] state never had the monopoly on violence", i.e. it was unwilling to prevent a terror war by the other armed factions (Hamas, Jihad) it was using for deniability.
He is convinced that the Palestinians took 1993 and decided on a game of Last Man Standing, and he is determined that Israel prevail. While I think that grimness is unwarranted–I think Israel could muddle along for a bit without generating a "wave of refugees from Gaza" by de-escalating to humiliate Hamas as it did with the PLO in Tunis in 1991 as opposed to 1985–we will kill you one by one, like the criminals you are, and get you all one by one rather than bomb you and make martyrs of your children–and come out ahead.
Inbar, unlike Hamas, does contemplate terms for the Palestinians (confederation with Jordan, with Egypt) that preserved their homes and their livelihoods from '49-'87 (to '87, with respect to Jordan's involvement in the West Bank) which is a generosity Hamas would never extend to Israeli Jews.
Eurosabra: I'm a updated, politically correct version of Alan Dershowitz and Abe Foxman and Rahm Emanuel without the rough edges…blah…blah…blah…us Jewish Zionist racists are really eminently reasonable people…blah…blah…blah…Ignore that man behind the curtain…blah…blah…blah…
Seriously, is this person for real? Is she widely read in, say, Israel and even amongst the Zionists here? Is this a credible piece? Is this piece for real? Who is she?
– She's been a professional journalist for decades. She still appears sometimes in the Christian Science Monitor, and, I assume, in some foreign papers, but she has moved a bit too far to the left for most of the mainstream broadsheets.
"Hamas is good for the Jews. As long as they are there it is a gift for us."
Haven't I heard a similar song before, by Theodore Herzl, no less:
Theodor Herzel
The founder of modern Zionism
Herzl stated in his diary
“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews.. . become worse. . . this will assist in realization of our plans. . .I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-Semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-Semites shall be our best friends”. (From his Diary, Part I, pp. 16)
Alas, the apples don't fall far from the trees.
Absolutely, Vera, that is the definitive quote, it can't be unearthed often enough.
Herzl: "I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth"
Obviously, he didn't anticipate how easily post-Christian American politicians could be bought-off with Jewish wealth on behalf of Zionism. Jewish American wealth has been Zionism's most powerful tool ever.
So the most well-kept secret of the mondoweissian underworld has been finally laid open: the real identity of the PAZ-JEW is none other than Efraim Inbar… well, maybe not. Then again, to see Inbar trying to outpaz the PAZ is priceless.
The ex-Sen. Arlen Specter aide [name?] and Lieberman's political alliance with the Christian zionist John Hagee was no accident.
The more pressure and $ that could be applied to dc politicians the better.
Shorter Eurosabra: Arab intransigence is a sin; Zionist intransigence is a virtue.
Efraim Inbar is so blatantly openly unapologetically racist I have trouble believe this interview is real. But if it is, wow, what an insight into the Israeli mindset.
After the interview,Inbar ordered some Israeli delicasies.when I was young,growing up in Nazareth,one of the jokes was about the israeli jew who would visit nazareth on saturday.Back In tel aviv,he rubs his stomach,with a sigh,and say,halachti lenatseret,achalti chummus,veshatiti mayem.I went to nazareth,I ate Hummus,and drank some water.Take it any way you want folks.
I read Cobban's piece and I read her blog every day. This really shouldn't surprise anyone, should it? Don't we have a Lieberman and we're shocked at this about Inbar?
What a loathsome, despicable excuse for a human being. He reminds me of Elliott Abrams!
Fascinating interview! Thanks for the link.
I respect Israelis like Efraim Inbar.
There is probably nothing that earns my contempt faster than lies, hypocricy, and insults to my intelligence, which is about all the useless armchair Zionists in the US have to offer.
Inbar speaks clearly and without any phony moralizing. I know where he stands, and I understand his logic.
I think that his ideas are not really going to work, at least not without perpetual US moral and financial support. Israel cannot depend on this anymore.
Seriously, is this person for real? Is she widely read in, say, Israel and even amongst the Zionists here? Is this a credible piece? Is this piece for real? Who is she?
Helena Cobban is very much for real, and is quite credible. Check out her CV here:
link to helenacobban.org
and her valuable blog here:
link to justworldnews.org
"I think that his ideas are not really going to work, at least not without perpetual US moral and financial support. Israel cannot depend on this anymore."
Stop foreign aid to Israel, and to anywhere: link to fff.org
No more welfare.
David F: "I think that his ideas are not really going to work, at least not without perpetual US moral and financial support. Israel cannot depend on this anymore."
Nor should it.