The commentary on the Iran/US/Israel triangle is coming fast and furious. It's too much for me to try to put together into a coherent post, so I thought I'd just give a rundown and links. We can sort it out in the comments:
- Tony Karon shares a report from Ha'aretz about how Israel might try to provoke an Iranian attack so it can retaliate in "self defense."
- Helena Cobban writes Israel wants to lure the US into war with Iran so that the US can inflict a level of damage Israel would be unable to carry out.
- Roger Cohen thinks Netanyahu won round one with Obama last week regarding Iran and thinks that "Obama is in Netanyahu’s Web"
- Fareed Zakaria believes "everything you know about Iran is wrong" and says there should be a long way to go before "launching the next Mideast war"
- Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett claim Obama's Iran policy "has, in all likelihood, already failed"
- Rabbi Brant Rosen has a "sinking feeling about all this"
And I'm sure there are plenty I'm missing. The one thing that everyone who comments on it agrees with is that Netanyahu's adviser's Amalek comment was ridiculous and dangerous. For the best post on that, see IPS' Daniel Luban.
Update: In his latest post, Luban gets biblical with Jeffrey Goldberg, who has been firing back at his critics. Luban's ending is great:
Finally, Goldberg prefaces his attack on Zakaria with the disclaimer that “I write this — I feel a need these days to make this point over and over again — as someone opposed to a military strike on Iran, either by the U.S. or Israel, because I can’t see how such a strike would be in the American national security interest.” His wounded insistence that he has no idea how anyone could view him as a hawk is a bit rich, considering that in recent months his primary focus has been drumming up hysteria about the Iranian nuclear program and reassuring American Jews about the Netanyahu government’s alleged seriousness and pragmatism. However, I suppose this is the true mark of a Serious Liberal. Just like those Jews who profess their devotion to the two-state solution and to ending the occupation, but in practice spend most of their time attacking anyone who makes a serious effort to further these goals, Goldberg is a supposed supporter of engagement with Iran who appears determined to undercut anyone who proposes any serious measures to make engagement work.
Cohen's and the Leveretts' articles contain basically the same message and that is that Obama's policy towards Iran is currently incoherent. He makes nice talk but then it is contradicted by Dennis Ross. He says no deadline on negotiations and then reassures Netanyahoo that it will take only a year. There are too many mixed signals coming out of Washington. I think Obama is being played by many different people right now but all have their primary loyalty to Israel. How can he tolerate Dennis Ross in his government ? The man has proven himself to be Israel's agent without any question. His best friends in Israel are right wing Likudniks. He effectively sabotaged Camp David where he and Barak manipulated Clinton like some country bumpkin. I do hope that Obama does not prove to as naive. Today it is clear, even if Obama is confusing everybody as to what his actual policies will be, it does seem clear that he will not order US forces to attack Iran nor will he allow Israel to do so. But Israel with her allies inside the US government could stir up trouble and provoke a crisis that Obama may be forced to take military action. The chances of an incident occurring is much higher if the Iranians are confused about US policy and if Obama allows zionists to hold important positions inside government.
The most interesting change among these folks is Roger Cohen. He has, essentially, turned American. Based on his previous posts, he was an Israel-firster like most of the commentariat, but now he seems to understand why it is he emigrated from England, not to Israel, but to America. Like Phil, he's beginning to manifest the zealotry of a convert, and that makes him, for the hasbara network, a massive liability: he preaches the truth, and America's interests, from one of the most important perches in the world.
Daniel Luban has a new piece on the Amalek controversy. Must read. http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=253
That's why the NY Times only publishes Cohen on line and not in print. I see they've cut off his comments as well. The odious Jeff Goldberg is now calling Roger Cohen "the John Mearsheimer manque of The New York Times." The day is coming when those who are on the wrong side of this issue will be scrambling to hide their previous position, just like with the Iraq war. Expect Goldberg to be specimen #1.
V. true. Orwell's 'memory hole' could have been invented to describe the U.S. press.
Let's put this into perspective: – 16 US intelligence agencies (all of them) concluded that Iran hasn't been seeking nuclear weapon capacity since 2003 – that''s 6 years of 'good behaviour'. – Khamenei has issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons – Ahmadinejad has said that reliance on nuclear (sorry nookular) weapons is 'politically retarded' – Ahmadinejad has also wished that the regime currently ruling Palestine should disappear (Don't we all wish that?) Netanyahoo is the top dog* in a piddling little Levantine country that happens to have the ear of the US. So was Saakashvili in Georgia. Where were the US Cavalry when he fucked up? *Actually, he's not – he's the scum on the top of a very nasty religio-nationalist government that, only this week. has introduced bills to: – Make Israeli-Arabs (20% 0f the population) swear an oath to the 'Jewish State' – Criminalise remembrance of the Nakhba
‘US won’t be upset if Israel strikes Iran’ Judy Siegel-Itzkovich, JPost, May 28 2009 http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=124334... Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, who has visited Israel 80 times since 1968, told the JPost on Wednesday:
By the way, Lautenberg also says in the same interview:
Israel's Next Move Armageddon Now? By NADIA HIJAB http://www.counterpunch.org/hijab05272009.html
This wouldn't be the first time Israel tried to trick the US into fighting a war on behalf of Israel. The Lavon Affair may have been the first, when, in 1954, Israel resorted to a terrorist bombing of US facilities in Egypt to create a US backlash against Egypt and in favor of Israel. Of course Israel would resort to these tactics again. Israel has gone so far as to openly attack US military targets such as the USS Liberty–and then have the gall to say it was an accident! History teaches that Israel will not hesitate to try to trick us into doing its dirty work, regardless of the cost to the US and the damage to US vital interests. The US military and intelligence establishments have a lot of anti-Israel animus from 60 years of being forced to subvert US national interests to the benefit of Israel. Obama should unleash them to keep Israel in line for once.
Both Caroline Glick in JPost and Eitan Haber in Ynet have articles connecting north Korea to Iran, the former ending up by saying that Israel stands alone against the terror masters or whatever, and the latter saying that WW3 has begun.
On the other hand, if the skull cap fits, wear it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-...