It’s the end of the special relationship as we know it (and I feel fine)

by on May 8, 2009 44
0sharesFacebook
0tweetsTwitter
0stumbledStumbleUpon
0sharesReddit
0recommendGoogle

Haaretz says that Obama doesn't clear stuff with Israel before going public, and Israel is upset. Grow up, son.
Newsweek says the same. Train wreck ahead. Obama isn't taking Netanyahu's cue on Iran or on the Palestinian state. Oh my, an American interest!

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Israel Lobby, Israeli Government, US Politics

{ 44 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. MRW says:
    May 8, 2009 at 7:35 pm

    Ha! Ha! Ha! This is better than a movie. Popcorn for the next three weeks and some bottles of vino.

  2. Chu says:
    May 8, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    Good for Obama. Is it necessary to play these semantic games with Israeli leaders? They want a greater Israel, they don't care about the rats that were living in their holy land. God gave them the land. – even if people were living there. It does not matter! God says so. And Gods word is final – ask any Rabbi. Do you hear me Palestinians! They are the Chosen and you are the filth. Tikkun Olam!

  3. MRW says:
    May 8, 2009 at 7:45 pm

    From the article, which is delicious: The Israeli officials said the problem also stems from the government change in both states and because clear work procedures between the sides have not been set established. "This will be one of the most important things Netanyahu will have to settle with Obama," a senior official said. However, the official said the new administration no longer seems to see Israel as a "special" or "extraordinary" state in the Middle East, with which the U.S. must maintain a different dialogue than with other states. "The feeling is that the dialogue and coordination with the Arab states and with Europe is today no less important to the U.S. and perhaps more so than with Israel," the official said. "This will be one of the most important things Netanyahu will have to settle with Obama," a senior official said. They're brain dead.

  4. hass says:
    May 8, 2009 at 8:23 pm

    Won't last. Carter tried it, Bush I tried it.

  5. Anthony says:
    May 8, 2009 at 8:36 pm

    Obama is going to Egypt!

  6. Joe Schick says:
    May 8, 2009 at 8:58 pm

    Calm yourselves, Phil and his neo-Nazi cheerleaders. Obama and Netanyahu will have disagreements, and the Obama Administration likely will put heavy pressure on Netanyahu's government, but this is nothing new. Clinton pressured Netanyahu too. Reagan and Begin clashed, as did Carter and Begin. So did Bush 41 and Shamir. As a pr0-Likud ZOA member and big Netanyahu fan, I admit I ain't too happy with the signals coming out of Obama's camp. But on the core issues, Israel and the U.S. are on the same page.

  7. Strahl says:
    May 8, 2009 at 9:12 pm

    Neo-Nazis? What the hell would you know about Nazis? People like you (scum) have devalued these terms. Whether it be 'Holocaust' or 'Nazi'. You're not even a Jew. You're just a fanatic nationalist. Weak-minded, racist moron.

  8. Declan in Ireland says:
    May 8, 2009 at 9:13 pm

    I'm with MRW on this one, pass the popcorn and let's wait for the train wreck:) Oh, is that a light at the end of that tunnel, Nah, it's just the O- train (I hope)

  9. Joe Schick says:
    May 8, 2009 at 9:18 pm

    Strahl, Thanks for the cogent argument. It's good to know that some of Phil's readers can debate substantive issues. By the way, your mother is asking you to come up from the basement.

  10. blackie says:
    May 8, 2009 at 9:22 pm

    Yeah, but Obama has teflon–he's half black, posited as all black… That's real Das Volk power in the the new USA.

  11. Colin Murray says:
    May 8, 2009 at 9:37 pm

    I want to throw my two cents in on Pres. Obama's apparent change in nuclear policy with Israel. This is really big. I am surprised, I thought he had given up, but he is bypassing the Lobby and cutting right to the heart of the matter. It is our military AND political subsidization of Israel that allows it to ethnically cleanse and colonize to the detriment of our interests. The strategy may be simultaneous increase in military aid and decrease in political aid. Pressure on Israel to sign the NPT and an unwillingness by America to go to war against Iran to delay their mastery of the nuclear fuel cycle concurrent with American acceptance that Iran is a nuclear power will change the strategic balance. Note that this does not require that Iran weaponize its nuclear program, although obviously that would be the most re-balancing scenario. It merely would require that they have the capability to do so. These outcomes would make it in Israel's best interest to come to an accommodation with Iran and become less bellicose in general. Having nuclear weapons aimed at you can change the way you view the world. The Israelis will pursue their own interests and likely modify their behavior, the necessity of which they dread far more than the ridiculous notion that Iran will launch a first strike against them. Once the Lobby is gifted with this fait accompli their extremists will likely lose support, strengthening America's hand to pursue our own interests while ensuring Israel's defense (the increase in military aid) but not facilitating its aggression (the decrease in political aid).

  12. tommy says:
    May 8, 2009 at 10:16 pm

    The Israelis must not have decent material to blackmail the president with.

  13. Colin Murray says:
    May 8, 2009 at 10:52 pm

    Maybe he actually has secure communications with his subordinates. Novel.

  15. jdva says:
    May 8, 2009 at 11:43 pm

    "Clinton pressured Netanyahu too." And what happened to Clinton again?

  16. AnaSanchez says:
    May 9, 2009 at 12:36 am

    He has earned "political capital" and I hope he spends it.

  17. DICKERSON3870 says:
    May 9, 2009 at 4:14 am

    RE: "Obama doesn't clear stuff with Israel before going public…" MY COMMENT: Oh, dear me. Goodness gracious! Tsk, tsk !

  18. DICKERSON3870 says:
    May 9, 2009 at 4:28 am

    RE: "It's the end of the special relationship as we know it (and I feel fine)" "…Six o'clock – TV hour. Don't get caught in foreign tower. Slash and burn, return, listen to yourself churn. Lock him in uniform and book burning, blood letting. Every motive escalate. Automotive incinerate. Light a candle, light a motive. Step down, step down. Watch a heel crush, crush. Uh oh, this means no fear – cavalier. Renegade and steer clear! A tournament, a tournament, a tournament of lies. Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives and I decline…." – R.E.M., from "It's The End Of The World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" SOURCE – http://www.absolutelyrics.com/lyrics/view/r.e.m./...

  20. Jacobwolfen says:
    May 9, 2009 at 12:58 pm

    You told him. I bet he's shivering and wishes he never crossed swords with such a masterful debater like you.

  21. Jacobwolfen says:
    May 9, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    No, she's not.

  22. JES49 says:
    May 9, 2009 at 1:07 pm

    Joe, I may not agree with you on the Likud or Netanyahu (I'm a member of Labour, but don't like Barak much more than Netanyahu), I think we can agree on two points. First, that this is probably much ado about nothing; it certainly is nothing new and Israel will survive. Secondly, this blog is indeed populated by Phil's neo-Nazi cheerleaders like a petri dish with the perfect medium: two guys with the surnames Weiss and Horowitz.

  23. JES49 says:
    May 9, 2009 at 1:13 pm

    First Colin, calm down and get your hand out of your pants. This does not represent a change in US nuclear policy towar Israel, rather a change in US policy toward Iran. I think, however, that the US will give dialogue a brief chance and then opt to impose more severe sanctions on Iran in the near future if and when this effort fails (as it looks likely to). Weaponization? I thought that the Iranians are developing the nuclear fuel cycle for peaceful purposes. At least that's what their leaders keep saying. Are you saying that they are liars?

  24. lurker says:
    May 9, 2009 at 2:26 pm

    Shimon Peres is making his rerun AIPAC speech now on C-SPAN. He starts out by telling us Uncle Sam and Uncle Irv are conjoined twins. There will be no surgery. I'd say Israel is the deformed one in the cult movie Basketcase.

  25. aristeides says:
    May 9, 2009 at 4:02 pm

    I wonder what it is that makes the Palestinians, descended as they presumably are in large part from the ancient Hebrews, filth rather than Chosen? Could it be because, by choosing to become Moslem and Christian, they have gone worshipping false gods? Well, then, isn't the worship of a state like Israel much more clearly the worship of a false god?

  26. aristeides says:
    May 9, 2009 at 4:07 pm

    There's no way to get Europe to agree to sanction Iran over nukes without admitting that Israel has nukes and then getting Israel to agree to submit to the NPT regime. The inequity is otherwise too blatant.

  27. aristeides says:
    May 9, 2009 at 4:08 pm

    Blackmail is like nukes. Once you defy someone threatening with them to go ahead and do their worst, they've lost most of their power.

  28. SNL says:
    May 9, 2009 at 4:21 pm

    "Now, isn't that special?" said the Church Lady.

  29. Shafiq says:
    May 9, 2009 at 6:04 pm

    Answering that question would require logic on the part of Zionists and sadly, that is something they lack.

  30. Shafiq says:
    May 9, 2009 at 6:05 pm

    Reagan tried to (sort of). He didn't do too badly.

  31. Shafiq says:
    May 9, 2009 at 6:08 pm

    Maybe you can point out the neo-Nazis here seeing as I'm having a problem finding them.

  32. Shafiq says:
    May 9, 2009 at 6:12 pm

    You still don't get it do you? Sanctions solely by the US aren't going to make a difference to Iran. Unless Iran finds a way to piss of Russia and China, the US can't do anything other than attempt 'regime change'.

  33. Colin Murray says:
    May 9, 2009 at 8:55 pm

    This does not represent a change in US nuclear policy towar Israel, rather a change in US policy toward Iran. You are wrong. The times they are a-changing. Israeli nuclear ambiguity is not in the US interest. It complicates our relations with Muslim nations, and good relations with them are by far more important than good relations with Israel. Our economic relations with them dwarf those we have with Israel and we have a very strong interest in serious non-proliferation, which Israel's policies hamstring. The Lobby is the only thing propping up anti-American pro-Israeli policies and its power, while still strong, is waning. Israel-firsters have reached their high water mark.. It is obvious to everyone who is not a pro-colonization Zionist that a re-alignment of strategic policy away from the AIPAC-driven failures of the past is in our interest, and on the way. Jerusalem worried over breakdown of U.S.-Israel cooperation under Obama Seven more years of President Obama! I bet he wins even more handily next time, with commensurate political capital to deploy in the domestic arena to re-align our foreign policies towards, even if obliquely, American interests. Defense of Israel will almost certainly remain a high priority, but the era is drawing to a close of America suffering the blowback for you petulant self-entitled colonial Zionist barbarians and reivers.

  34. Colin Murray says:
    May 9, 2009 at 9:09 pm

    Weaponization? I thought that the Iranians are developing the nuclear fuel cycle for peaceful purposes. At least that's what their leaders keep saying. Are you saying that they are liars? I have no idea if they are lying or not. It is certainly possible that they are telling the truth. However, leadership and policies change, and I think eventually intransigent Israeli hostility will convince them they would be absolutely mad not to deploy second-strike nuclear weapons. Maybe Israel will surprise everyone and acquiesce to a fair final-status agreement with the Palestinians with concurrent normalization with most of the rest of the Muslim world. I won't hold my breath.

  35. Margaret599 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 2:12 am

    Colin – My concern, then, is what you've left unexplored: military support for Israel.

  36. Margaret599 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 2:30 am

    What a great group of links! Thanks, people.

  37. Margaret599 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 2:37 am

    Strahl, I would have you ask yourself by what prerogative you take upon yourself the ability to say who is and isn't a Jew, or who is and is not allowed to define themselves as deriving values from a personal heritage ?

  38. Margaret599 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 2:40 am

    Back atchya, Joe Schick, you nationalist cheerleader, you.

  39. Margaret599 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 2:45 am

    Michael Hirst is v. opinionated: "The possibility that Israelis might lose the support of the one nation that can guarantee their security awakens an existential dread that no politician can long survive." I really dislike the either/or nature of existentialism; yet if this is true, then let the debate wail.

  40. JES49 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 3:42 am

    Obama hasn't even gotten throught the first year of his first term, and you're predicting seven more years? Good luck. It is clear to everyone who is not an anti-Israel nut that you guys hysterically overstate AIPAC's role in US foreign policy (successes and failures). If you study the history of the Middle East during the last half of the 20th century, you'll see that for most of that time, the US, when it did not have an "even-handed" approach did not show favorism toward the Israeli side.

  41. JES49 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 3:45 am

    So, let me see. What you advocate is pressure on Israel to sign the NPT, so that they will have to get rid of their nuclear weapons. At the same time you don't mind if Iran, who is already a signatory of the NPT, develops nuclear weapons. That's a real consistent position, Colin.

  42. JES49 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 8:44 am

    Uh Shafiq, Iran's missiles will have the capability to reach deep within both Russia and China (as well as to parts of Western Europe). In addition, Iran has been stirring up trouble in the Muslim regions of Russia and the Former Soviet Union since the breakup of the USSR.

  43. Margaret599 says:
    May 10, 2009 at 8:44 am

    Jes49, recognizing the danger to Iran that is evident from Israel's saber rattling establishes cause for Iran's development of nuclear weapons absent Israel agreeing to the NPT. Where is the inconsistency?

  44. Shafiq says:
    May 10, 2009 at 10:19 am

    Well at the moment, they don't seem too bothered about the possibility of Iran getting nuclear weapons. Russia is even helping Iran with its civilian nuclear programme

Leave a Reply