We are continuing to collect responses to the Obama/Netanyahu meeting on Monday. Ali Abunimah says the meeting represented no hope or change for US policy. He is especially critical of Obama’s endorsement of Israel as a Jewish state and raises the important point – what’s the point of the US pressuring Israel if the solution they’re advocating won’t end the conflict? Abunimah:
Obama reportedly believes peace in Palestine is the key to transforming US relations with the "Muslim world." If he were serious about this, the US would have to break with all its past policies and support peace based on democratic and universal human rights principles and equality — something incompatible with a commitment to Israel as a "Jewish state" practicing legalized discrimination. All the signs are however that the Obama administration will push to try to force Palestinians and Arabs to accept and normalize Israel as it is and that the US will continue to underwrite a morally and politically bankrupt Zionist settler-colonial project with a permanent American military, economic and diplomatic bailout.
Mustafa Barghouti made a similar point in the LA Times and I agree. How can ensuring a exclusive Jewish state end a conflict that is rooted in systemic inequality between Jews and Palestinians? Obama should take a more radical, and democratic, approach – equal rights for all.
The structural problem in Stolen and Occupied Palestine is but a reflection of the structural problem here in the USA: Jewish Social Networking Goes Supreme!
"All the signs are however that the Obama administration will push to try to force Palestinians and Arabs to accept and normalize Israel as it is…" First to give in will be Egypt followed by Jordan….
Obama seems, at this point, ready to sacrifice all his political capitol for the very people who would destroy him the second they get the chance. He is gonna end up the world's biggest chump. He seems to have no ability at all to deal with the military, just rolls over for them.
"How can ensuring a exclusive Jewish state end a conflict that is rooted in systemic inequality between Jews and Palestinians? " Because recognizing Israel as Israel and Palestine as Palestine, is the ONLY possible reconciliation in a generation. Any solution does have to resemble respect, but that cannot take the form of "leave", or "don't be Zionist". I got that Abunimeh would feel uncomfortable considering having to ask for a visa to visit family or former hometown. But, that is the status of many Israeli Jews in recent and current history as well. Its enough to establish a viable Palestine. Are you dropping the commitment to two-states as well, Adam? You do know that every time a 180 occurs in proposal, it delays resolution indefinitely. Also, given the history of Israeli economic dominance over the region that Zionists are allowed to settle in (not only military), I would think that Palestinians would want some protection from the Judaization of the whole region.
"I would think that Palestinians would want some protection from the Judaization of the whole region" Nice opinion you have of the Israelis, Richard. So you think Israel is capable of simply Judaising the whole region? So that's your Jewish State, an expansionist state in the old barbarian tradition? Or is the Jewish birth-rate suddenly going to…, oh, sorry, that still won't get them the land without the conquering. Richard, you should try to be honest, like "Jacobwolfsen" You don't have the chops for the kind of obfuscation you pretend to.
Obama is just dragging it out, nothing will come of a 2 state and they all know it. Natenyahu laughed all the way home. Obama hopes he stalled further hassels for his term. Frauds.
Mooser, You've never had a clue as to my perspective. That you trash me before finding out in fact, speaks very poorly for you.
Link is not working. (can find it with google)
Richard, I only know what you write. The fact that you can think in terms of the Judaization of the whole region can mean only two things "a peopleless land for alandless people" or "Death to the Arabs" It is an astounding declaration of your disregard for the rights of Palestinians. By what method do you envision" the Judiasation of the entire region"? We fall from heaven, like manna. I realise that ZIonism, unlike Judaism, worships the human will along with Jewish supremacy, but could you at least make a good-faith attempt to appear human?
"That you trash me before finding out in fact, speaks very poorly for you" And furthermore, Richard Witty (if that is your real name, it doesn't sound Jewish to me.) I don't need that to speak poorly of me. I can do a good enough job on my own! So go back to your oleagenous obfuscations, you osteochondritic basiphobiac.
What on earth is the matter with equality before the law? Stop even categorizing people by religion, the way South Africa had to stop categorizing people by race. You know legal equality is the only reason diverse people are living together successfully in the United States. I can't take your house and wall you in because you are of another religion. The simple truth of this, the lesson of our own civil rights movement, has finally penetrated US public opinion. There is no going back. We will not pay for a regime of segregation and discrimination. American Jews will lead the way, and the cultural space of Jewish non-zionism will come to dominate American Judaism. It's happening very rapidly already.
Then we better cut off aid to Egypt and stop dealing with the Muslim world.
I suspect what Obama is angling for, at best, is a viable enough Palestinian state to be recognized by the rest of the Middle East, to take the heat off the US. As far as his pronouncement of Israel as a Jewish state, I take it he would be happy to have that wrapped up as an internal Israeli problem.
RE: "…oleagenous obfuscations, you osteochondritic basiphobiac" MY COMMENT: Oh, dear me. Such alliteration!
The aid to Egypt is for the benefit of the Israelis! I would be happy to see it discontinued.
That aid to Egypt is really an aid to israel.Under The so called peace treaty ,Egypt has to sell oil and gas to israel for pennies on the dollar.So really the USA is subcidising israel's oil and gas purcaheses. Now add that amount to israel's annual aid tally.
Gee, Phil and Adam seem to be getting past the fog of hope with Obama and getting some sense of how he didn't just fold, but effectively immolated himself (and U.S. policy) with Netanyahu. Here's the proof guys: After a meeting you can get a real good sense of its significance by noting who is thereafter obligated to do what. So the Obama/Netanyahu meeting breaks up and who comes out of that obliged to do what? Israel/Netanyahu? Zero. Instead, almost hallucinogenically, Obama emerges and effectively says that the onus is now on all the various *arab* states to first recognize Israel and normalize relations with it, because of course *then* Israel will strike a deal with the Palestinians and milk and honey will run in the streets. Sorry Phil, Adam; it just ain't happening.
Adam, you once again add "exclusive" into the equation. Obama doesn't call for that, Netanyahu doesn't call for that. For that matter, Avigdor Lieberman doesn't even call for that. Do you think that if you repeat the lie enough, that it becomes the truth?
I like Ali's summary: "peace based on democratic and universal human rights principles and equality".. still too long winded for Madison avenue. personally I think "equal rights and justice" is pretty close, but it's still framed in the context of a state, or states. btw, a Jewish state implies specialness to Jews, and 2nd class citizenship for everyone else. but it's not limited to Obama's blurb, just look at the flag. They stole the Jewish brand and tied it to a state, when in fact it was, and still is state-free.
Me too Dickerson, me too.
U.S. aid is reserved for U.S. puppets and prospective slaves (Israel being the exception).Example: Israel goes around destroying their "enemies" (unarmed Arab population) with U.S. state of the art weapons while U.S. hides behind a rock, when it's done U.S. crawls out from behind the rock, climbs over over the rubble waving money to the remaining starving, maimed and homeless "victims." It's also the cue for Christian missionaries to bring the bibles-for-food-and-medicine.
I agree with Sin. Obama+Natenyahu= dog and pony show. I've seen and heard it a hundred times, one U.S. administration after another. Only the "W" regime made a difference by giving Israel carte blanche to terminate the resistance wherever needed. The U.S. followed the masters with U.S. soldiers and money bags. That's what 9/11 was all about. IMHO.
Sorry about the bad link. Here is the corrected version. (I forgot to run my fix-hyperlinks script.) The structural problem in Stolen and Occupied Palestine is but a reflection of the structural problem here in the USA: Jewish Social Networking Goes Supreme!
(ignoring for the moment sentiments of hatred). the idealism of wishing for a world as diverse and equitable as the u.s. of a is commendable. but idealism without a modicum of realism yields bloodshed and injustice more often than not. (see french revolution, russian revolution and mao's bloody reign, if you need some examples.) two elements of realism should be mentioned: 1. the path to a two state solution is not easy, but it is clear. the path to a one state solution is by no means as clear. 2. the region where israel/palestine is located is not one where democracy or diversity rules the day. it is rather one where monarchy and police state mechanisms control the reins of power and the zeitgeist of the street is one of islamism, which has no real respect for diversity or equality. politics is the art of the possible, so a politician like obama is not aiming for pie in the sky. and for those of you aiming for pie in the sky, you wouldn't be there to suffer the consequences when your one state of equality yields the hamas version of one state, which none of you would wish to endure.
Actually, what will cause Obama's downfall will be Israeli intransigence and US impotence in the face of it. He has put it all on the line from day one and to turn aside or back down now will only destroy his presidency. His credibility will fly right out the window and his enemies foreign and domestic will be enervated. If he is going to go down, he may as well go down fighting.
Ali Abunimah and everyone else who is upset because Obama didn't play the act they preferred or expected of him are all dead wrong. Had Obama done as he and many here & elsewhere suggest, his I/P peace initiatives would have been marked DOA at that precise moment in time. Lets get another thing clear. The two state solution is only being debated today because Obama has resuscitated it from the Gaza death blow the Israelis tried killing it. Its been nothing but one disaster after another for the Israelis these past several years, and last Monday's meeting between Obama and Natanyahu was no big win for Likudnik's either. Obama will have to act and that of course means soon, firmly, at times maybe harshly. He can't be screwing around with this next year without a solid effort and something to show for it. And he has advanced his credibility and office too far on this issue to bail and run out on it without severe consequences to his regency. Who will take this man seriously if he proves himself a fraud? David Ignatius has some interesting thoughts on this of which a considerable portion I'm in agreement. Upping the Ante on Israel By David Ignatius http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/stor...
In Palestine and EVERY Arab country as well.
A stacked deck "democratic" Palestine is also in conflict with "democratic and universal human rights". A Jewish state doesn't imply specialness, but identity. The US rebelled against colonial nationalism, and then adopted it. We have no basis of vanity. The selection of jurisdiction is NOT a given. Palestine was a single jurisdiction only temporarily, and changing throughout history. There is nothing sacred about the river to sea as boundary of jurisdiction. Its a new concept. "We were always there" (False). "We were always called Palestine" (False). "We are a nation with a national identity" (True.) But, the nation with a common identity is NOT the merged nation of Israel and Palestine. They are in fact, separate communities, separate nations. They can be more integrated, but the discipline of the Palestinian nationalists during the intifadas put a stop to that.
exclusive = "Jewish state" "the lie" is what?
"idealism without a modicum of realism" = diverse and equitable as the u.s. of a The path to a one state solution is quite clear: equal rights under the law. like the "democracy" of Israel is less adverse than "monarchy and police state mechanisms" !! "Islamism" and "the Jewish state" are two sides to the same coin
Maybe I spoke too late. S/S Hillary has come out swinging in an interview on Al-Jazeera: "….We want to see a stop to settlement construction – additions, natural growth, any kind of settlement activity – that is what the president has called for…" "…We also are going to be pushing for a two-state solution, which by its very name implies borders that have to be agreed to and we expect to see two states living side-by-side…" She hammered home that a Palestinian entity will be a SOVEREIGN state will all that implies. "…We are starting this intensive engagement right now. We have consulted broadly already. George Mitchell and I have spoken with many Arab leaders and of course with the Palestinians and the Israelis and we are determined to forge ahead…" Abunimah is a one stater and no supporter of the two state solution. He knows that Palestinian resistance has reached such a state of development that it cannot be defeated in spite of its current liabilities and disunity. Israel proved that fact beyond all doubt when they stupidly invaded Gaza and failed in crushing HAMAS. Abunimah is pedaling a truck load of canards like a Trojan horse, because he knows in the long run a one state in Palestine will not be a Zionist one.
Link to above statements. Clinton calls on Israel to halt 'any kind' of settlement activity http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1087098.html
Gotta disagree rfjk, with you and Ignatius. Let's break down the issues and examine 'em one by one. First of course on anyone's list is Netanyahu's walking away from the Wye agreement whereby Israel acceded to a two-state solution. Not only does this present a huge methodological challenge, but an almost total substantive one. That is, how in the world does the U.S. allow the Israelis to renounce previously agreed to positions without essentially saying "oh yeah, they can do that any time in the future too?" But Obama let him. And on the substantive side if there's no two-state solution to be discussed, what *is* to be discussed since not only the Palestinians but *us*—the *Americans*—say that's all to be discussed? So what happened at the meeting? Obama got squat on this. Netanyahu emerged still renouncing Wye and two-states. Bada-bing. A huge step backwards. Indeed maybe a total one; after all what's to talk about anymore? Okay, so then we have the continued settlement building, and what did Obama get there? A spit in the eye on the eve of the meeting with Israel's announcement of permitting a brand new settlement, and Netayahu emerging from the meeting saying absolutely zilch about stopping that one or any others. Period. And then going to Jerusalem and saying it will never be under shared governance again, ever. And then, what did Obama do? Well, he emerged seeming to reverse his own hinted-at position and seeming now to say that yes, Israel *can* insist on being recognized as a "jewish" state, whatever the hell that means. (Possibly including the right to expel its own arab citizenry into the future.) And then there's Iran. Of course in the first place the formal position of U.S. Intelligence is that Iran isn't even building a nuke. And now he got suckered into saying enough so that he's looks like he's pledged to start turning the screws on Iran by either the end of this year or in one year, period. And then he is reported as agreeing to continue the sham of the U.S. pretending that Israel doesn't have nukes and so, at the same time demanding that no arab countries have them, stay silent on Israel not signing the NPT. Ignatius and a few others of course try to spin this by talking as if Obama dunked Netanyahu by dissuading him from attacking Iran before. But that was absolute 100% bluff. The Israeli military and intelligence people have already said that even *if* they got American permission to attack Iran with their limited abilities all they could inflict would be very temporary damage. So they always needed the US. So overall what's the situation after this meeting? Well here's to quote Ignatius himself: "The Obama strategy over the next few months will be to create a regional framework for peace negotiations that's enticing enough to draw in the wary Netanyahu. To give Israel some quick tangible benefits, the United States wants the Arabs to begin normalizing relations with the Jewish state." So ah yes, it's *Israel* that's getting the "quick tangible benefits," while the next in the series of eternal, innumerable, utterly meaningless "peace processes" waits, and waits and waits. And this time we aren't even waiting for the *Palestinians* to do something new that's been cooked up. No! *This* time it's an unstated and unidentified number of *other* actors have to do something first! The U.S. has gotta go around you see and bribe or threaten a whole bunch of *other* countries to now go and do something first! And now of course Obama's failure to get 100% of that can be cited at any time by Israel as the perfectly legitimate reason for it to do nothing. So what did Obama get? Wow, Netanyahu saying he's ready to talk to the Palestinians at any time. Just like the Israelis have been willing to talk to them for 40 years now. And now, this time, its not just the Palestinians saying that the talks he agreeing to are meaningless, even as per the *U.S.'s* positions they are meaningless. Obama got raped.
enervated? You mean "energised", right? But yes, I think Obama put it all on the line and is depending on people who will stab him right in the back. I'll ask it a thousand times: What the hell does Obama think America's military and intelligence services can do for him that they weren't able to do for George Bush? And during the Bush regime, they probably made their best try to accomplish something. From here on in it's all about stirring up as much trouble as possible. The more chaos, the less accounting. Obama will end up the chump.
Oh, it's just a knack. When I read Witty, the appropriate terms just spring to mind. The man is a guffin, a spineless invertebrate.
Witty you have been reduced to stringing together words that have no meaning in relation to eachother, but some of them sound nice. You have become a walking, talking, ZIonist non-sequiter. "A Jewish state doesn't imply specialness, but identity" Yeah, like the "Christian Identity" groups in the US? Hey, Witty, what would happen if you looked at what people actually did, and admitted that changing the words doesn't change the acts?
Wow! Go Hilary! Maybe she will be the beneficiary of Bill's experience this time, not the victim of it. Nice change.
If Ignatius and I are right your well on your way to some serious, major disappointments.
No no; not at all. I am actually *hoping* I'm wrong. I just don't see it.
I hope for the best, but there has been no change for 60 something years and I don't see what is any different now other than the U.S. president is a black man. Does that make a difference? I hear all the same stuff. I see all the same stuff. What happens is we wait and wait and wait for a break through meanwhile Israel continues to build settlements even when the US says NOT to. Arabs continue to be attacked. Most people don't even know that the attacks are actually continuous. For example, prior to the attack on S. Lebanon in 2006 I kept reading in the Arab newspapers that Israel was flying over their airspace (nothing new) and taking out houses where they thought someone lived whom they wanted to assassinate . They bomb roads and bridges just for fun. They shoot missiles daily hitting entire families. No one hears anything on the mainstream news until Israel wants to announce that 'because rockets have been fired at them they are going to assault the enemy because "Israel has the RIGHT to defend herself." So? Lately there is an uproar, the good Americans demand some kind of peace arrangement and now they are talking about a 2 state AGAIN. Just to shut us up. If I'm wrong, how happy I will be. If Obama is "the man" how wonderful. Hillary Clinton is a Zionist agent in case no one has noticed. So Is Obama if what he speaks is true and so is John McCain. I just voted for a black man for fun because Ron Paul was out and there was no one left to seriously vote for.
The real questions is can they find an Arab puppet to crush the Palestinians for them.
Hillary only played the Zionist card while she was a Senator from New York. Many would say this is despicable and less than honorable conduct in a politician, but than that's naivety compounded by ignorance because there's absolutely nothing that's not despicable and dishonorable about politics. Few pols ever retain the respect of the people or become statesman. Prior to becoming First Lady and a Senator Hillary's stance was originally pro Palestinian and her one time friends are lambasting her for it. Jewish Leaders Blast Clinton Over Israel Criticism http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=46942 Jewish Lobby Says Hillary Too Pro-Palestinian http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=46942 I have got news for them. THEY NEVER KNEW HER!!! There is also a lesson here that you DON'T FOLLOW THE MONEY IN POLITICS!!! You do that on Wall Street or bribery and fraud cases in court. Those who buy politicians are buying PROTECTION. Its the supreme definition and act of the weak in politics. Behold how corporate America runs to Obama in the various business, banking and medical crises afflicting the nation. The Republican party is in ruins and a weakened state and lays bare for true limited-republic conservatives and constitutionalists to cease and dominate the party. If Ron Paul's movement and natural allies in the party can't do this than the game is up and dreams of returning to first principles are dead. I voted for Paul in the primaries, but I have come to believe that I and Paul are men out of time and the republic we believe in is long gone never to return. One could say Obama got elected in spite of his color. Whatever the merits or demerits of his election we will all find out soon enough what kind of a man and president he will be. The kind of action you desire to see in the man must be forthcoming not long after these last meetings with Egypt's Mubarak, Abbas and the Iranian elections. Any move or act before 12 June would be more than foolhardy, it would be incredibly stupid. So far, I haven't learned or noticed anything stupid about Obama. I would expect the fireworks to begin around July and escalate in increasing tempo. If the status-quo ante is no different by 12 Dec than today, Obama's regency is finished and predict he is a one term president. Its not easy to see or recognize change in current time as it is to look back with hindsight these past 60 years at the massive changes that have transformed our world. As regards foreign policy I am a hard core realist to which all domestic issues, economics or partisanship takes a back seat. As far as Israel is concerned I judge it only in terms as to its utility and usefulness to American economic and strategic national interests. I further don't believe it matters who is president of the US. Powerful economic and geo-political forces are driving US foreign policy, and one of those realities is the dying special relationship with Israel and changing posture of the US in the Middle East. The following IPS analysis fairly sums it up. MIDEAST: Israel Slow to Recognise New U.S. Face http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=46942
rfjk, you've made this the most important thread on this blog. And you have some good points (and information) about Hillary, with your hopes shining through. (Something dour old guys like me are suspicious of, but which is still nice to see.) But how do you know with these statements from Hillary—and from Obama too to the extent he is making some smart ones amidst an ocean of bad ones—aren't just saying these things in a desperate attempt to keep the Palestinians and arabs from throwing up their hands and having the situation explode on them as their first crisis? That's my take really. Obama got everyone's hopes up, he goes into that meeting with Netanyahu and emerges looking like he just flopped over on his back for the guy … of *course* he and Hillary have gotta now ratchet up the hopeful talk for the arabs and the Palestinians. Elsewise there might be another intifada or worse, and then just as with past Presidents Obama would simply be forced to toe the line supporting whatever Israel does in response. Aside from words though, what's the substantive situation? In effect it's us telling the Palestinians that yes, we agree with them that there must be a two-state solution and an end to the expansion of settlements, but that no, sorry, we aren't actually going to *do* anything to stop subsidizing Israel's rejection of both those ideas. Before at least the U.S. could always claim that it wasn't really supporting this colonialism because Israel always at least said it was willing to give up substantial parts of the occupied territories and stop the settlements and negotiate over Jerusalem. Now that Israel officially says "never," of course we have to increase the volume of our statements about how much we don't like what we in fact are totally enabling. Of *course* we do.
the sad thing is they already have Abbas, and he will "negotiate on behalf of the Palestinians" for a Bantustan until the BDS movement puts forth a voice that says, "by the way, he doesn't really represent us or what we're asking for". Abunimah has been saying that all along. The thing that's significant about Obama is how he is not longer the straight-talkin progressive that we elected. True, he did prostrate himself before AIPAC, but for the most part he spoke in plain language about real things that matter to real people. Now we have to time-consumingly decipher what he REALLY means when he says "remain a jewish state", meanwhile the "slow transfer" continues in the West Bank.
Likud party platform: "The right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel is an eternal right, not subject to dispute, and includes the right to security and peace. Zionism is the liberation movement of the Jewish people, and its fulfillment is at the top of the list of priorities of the Government of Israel. Immigration will be increased, and settlement will be strengthened. The decision to freeze settlements will be rescinded". From the Arab side, they want their land back, no ifs ands or buts. There's "Hamas" for you. Nothing radical about that. Nothing to spook anyone about. The Christian Palestinians want it ALL back, the Arab Jews and the Arab Muslims. The a-r-a-b-s… In the a-r-a-b world. Palestinians are not afraid of each other, they were living in peace together before the European Zionist invasion. Want the "liberated" Jews to live somewhere safe? Let's give them Utah. There is plenty of room. Let them "make that desert bloom" they being so clever and all. And let's arrange it so that the Zionist lovin people live on their borders. There is PEACE for the "liberated" Jews. The Arab Jews will choose to stay in the Arab world.