Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt. No it’s in Washington

by Philip Weiss on November 5, 2009 · 17 comments

Hillary says everything’s hunkydory! Amazing piece by Laura Rozen at FP mouthpiecing the State Department and saying that the two-state-solution is humming along like a Swiss watch. What planet are we living on? Do the media owe the American people any idea of the desperation of the Palestinian condition? Happy talk:

And the Secretary, by investing time with her Arab and Israeli counterparts and leaders, moved us forward," [ass't sec'y Jeffrey] Feltman continued. And got them "focused on the endgame: a two state solution, comprehensive peace and what do we need to do start getting to that end game."

"You heard the Egyptian statement of policy," Feltman continued. "They have moved a lot closer to our position about wanting to focus on the end game than you might have heard from Arab foreign ministers or leaders or week ago. I think this shows the power of personal diplomacy, the power of [Clinton's] investing in these things."

This is Nero-esque. And a reminder that it hurts everyone when you bury the truth. BBC is reporting that dozens of countries are behind the Goldstone report and the debate that it’s started.

The stakes here are monstrously large. Here Spencer Ackerman and Nadia Hijab argue that the Obama administration’s decision to bury Goldstone has had a radicalizing effect on Palestinian politics…

Related Posts

  1. The Nation: ‘for all practical purposes, one nation between river and sea…’
  2. the deal
  3. Akiva Eldar: one state, between the river and the sea
  4. Akiva Eldar: one state, between the river and the sea
  5. Jerusalem neocon who claims influence in D.C. says Israel faces Nazi societies in Jordan and Egypt

{ 17 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Richard Witty November 5, 2009 at 11:29 am

It doesn’t look like sacrificing a pawn for better position.

But, I don’t know. Do you?

2 Chaos4700 November 5, 2009 at 11:31 am

“I don’t know.”

Finally! Something I can’t argue with you over, Witty.

3 Citizen November 5, 2009 at 12:09 pm

Looks to me like sacrificing a lot of Palestinian pawns, and also, in the larger game, sacrificing a lot of American pawns. Rest easy, Witty, you won’t have to scrifice anythings or anyone you care about.

4 Citizen November 5, 2009 at 12:12 pm

Sorry 4 the typos. It’s just really annoying that Witty is so Zionist and he does not see that being a Zionist is extremely unAmerican.

5 Citizen November 5, 2009 at 12:12 pm

Sorry 4 the typos. It’s just really annoying that Witty is so Zionist and he does not see that being a Zionist is extremely unAmerican.

6 Shmuel November 5, 2009 at 1:23 pm

Ok, time for the kid-emperor-clothes thing. There is no endgame when only one side gets to play AND make up the rules as it goes along! All of the “concessions” that the US is making to Israel (on the Palestinians’ behalf mind you) make the possibility of any remotely just outcome less likely, not more likely. It’s not about preconditions or tactical losses, or anything like that. It is about establishing a deeply flawed process that will have a deeply flawed outcome, assuming for a moment that it will have any outcome at all. Long live the honest broker!

7 potsherd November 5, 2009 at 1:28 pm

And blocking any moves that might actually result in real progress, such as talking with Hamas. These people are down at the bottom of a very deep box and they can’t conceive of thinking outside it.

8 Chaos4700 November 5, 2009 at 5:46 pm

Are you talking about health care reform, Schmuel, or the I-P negotiations? Except for a couple of words, what you describe kind of applies to both.

Scary thought, huh?

9 Ael November 5, 2009 at 5:39 pm

Has anyone noticed that a number of folks are echoing Goldstone’s request that both the Israeli government and the Hamas government should conduct an independent investigation?

Doesn’t this put Hamas at the same level as Israel (i.e. they are both legitimate governments) Is this the backdoor to international recognition?

10 Chaos4700 November 5, 2009 at 5:43 pm

Possibly. Though to be fair, most of the world actually does recognize Palestine already. On the UN Security Council at this point, I believe only United States extends no such recognition at all, whereas Britain and France extend a sort of diplomatic recognition gray area.

11 tr November 5, 2009 at 11:11 pm

ok shmuel – now you’ve got me curious. i’m of palestinian descent and i don’t think i’ve ever before heard an israeli articulate views that are as close to mine as yours are – close to the point of indistinguishability: equal rights, all avoidance of this core issue ultimately and tragically futile, etc. this is a reaction not just to your present posting, but rather an aggregate response.
my question: what happened? how did you come to hold the views you do, given that they are so marginal in the society you come from? i can imagine that your answer will be that you thought about the situation you and your country find yourselves in, sought the parameters of an enduring solution, and here they are. if so, you may like to turn the question on its head – why, in your estimation, don’t more israelis see it the way you do?
i ask with the greatest respect, and with the realization that i am probing into sensitive matters not my own. but if you’re willing to share, i suspect others might be interested too.

12 Shmuel November 9, 2009 at 12:11 pm

tr,

Thanks for the question and the spirit in which it was asked. I agree that it is important to understand the mechanisms of such seemingly radical changes of position – hopefully, to be able to duplicate them. I’m not sure how much help my personal experiences will be, but here goes.

I had somewhat further to go than your average secular Israeli, because I was raised in a right-wing, religious environment (although my parents were never especially right-wing). My first jump was to leave that environment – motivated more by theology than politics – and to begin to develop as a secular liberal. It is not uncommon for the “newly secular” to become cultural left-wingers, as the left wing is the natural bastion of secularism and rationalism. Zionism was a given, but so was liberalism (perhaps a secular revaluation of the religious ethics I had been taught), including a commitment to peaceful resolution and human rights. I went to Peace Now demonstrations (even while I was in the army – as did many other soldiers), joined the Meretz party, supported negotiations with the PLO and a two-state solution. I was aware of some internal contradictions in my point of view – particularly between my support for a Jewish state, support for Israel being a “state of all its citizens” (get rid of rabbinical control AND be fairer to Palestinian Israelis, all in one fell swoop!) and support for a two-state solution – but felt that I could live with these contradictions. I demonstrated against the construction of Jewish settlements in Arab neighbourhoods in Jerusalem, joined the Israeli Committee against House Demolitions and went to protest and help rebuild demolished Palestinian homes in the West Bank. Contacts with right-wingers and even moderates became increasingly problematic (especially within the family), but I felt pretty good about myself. I was already part of a relatively radical minority, but still defined myself as a Zionist and sought a two-state solution to the “conflict” – seeing the occupation as the source of virtually all of the country’s problems. It was a minority, but not an extremely small one, especially among the intelligentsia.

Then came the Second Intifada, and I was shocked to the core – especially by the way in which the Israeli police had responded to demonstrations by Palestinian Israelis, shooting and killing 13 demonstrators. These were Israeli citizens, theoretically protected by the law, but they were not treated like Jewish demonstrators – even violent Jewish demonstrators. They were treated and spoken of like an external enemy. It then dawned on me that it wasn’t really about the occupation of the WB and Gaza. At about the same time, I started to hear about the Palestinian Right of Return, as one of the subjects (maybe the most important one) that had led to the failure of talks between Arafat and Barak at Camp David. I started to read about the refugees and the ROR, and found myself unable to reconcile the sympathy I felt for them and my understanding of their just demands, with my belief in the justness of, and need for a Jewish state. If the ROR were implemented, it would mean the end of the Jewish state, and maintaining the Jewish state would mean that ROR would be impossible. On the other hand, the refugee issue (as we had seen at Camp David) could not just be swept under the rug (as even Arafat would seem to have done for far too long). At about that time, I started to read Edward Said, and became convinced of his assertion that any solution that did not seriously address the refugees and the status of the Palestinians of 48 (Palestinian citizens of Israel), as well as the occupation of the WB and Gaza, would end in failure. I joined the Al-Awda Right of Return Coalition mailing list to hear what Palestinians had to say. I read and I argued and some of the posts made me livid, but slowly, I became convinced that my internal contradictions were untenable and I had to choose between liberalism and belief in intrinsic human worth, and a fundamentally racist ideology. So, I went from Zionist to non-Zionist (I didn’t find post-Zionism particularly appealing) to anti-Zionist. Along the way I met some incredible Palestinians with whom I had far more in common in terms of core values than I did even with left-wing Zionists, and became convinced of the idea of equal rights within a single, democratic state.

By this time, living in Israel had become unbearable, and so my wife and I decided to leave the country, but took our commitment to justice in Palestine with us.

13 Rehmat November 6, 2009 at 8:41 am

Since Sadaat’s surrender – Egypt has lost its will to fight the daily injustice done to Palestinians and Lebanese. In fact, the annual US$1.5 billion bribe Egyptian regime receives – is to protect Israeli occupation. Along with other two Western proxies – Saudi Arabia and Jordan – Cairo is trying its best to keep the resurgence of Islamic power under control.

The Israeli-Egyptian spying relationship, though not reported in the media, have long history. In fact, one of “Israel’s spy hero” happens to be Gamal Nasser’s son-in-law Ashraf Marwan.

Israel’s Egyptian Spy Hero
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/05/30/israels-egyptian-spy-hero/

14 tr November 11, 2009 at 12:04 am

thanks shmuel, very interesting to hear about your journey. especially interesting that it was the october 2000 shootings of the 13 demonstrators that tipped the balance for you. i wouldn’t have guessed it in advance. but then i’ve never viewed zionism “from the inside” as you have.

15 Shmuel November 11, 2009 at 2:08 am

tr:

especially interesting that it was the october 2000 shootings of the 13 demonstrators that tipped the balance for you. i wouldn’t have guessed it in advance. but then i’ve never viewed zionism “from the inside” as you have.>/blockquote>

I guess the final myth that needed shattering, the one that so many progressive Zionists can’t let go of (see the recent thread on Bernard Avishai’s “democratic state with a Jewish character”), is the one enshrined in Israel’s declaration of independence, the belief that it is possible for a Jewish state to treat all citzens equally, “regardless of creed, race or gender” (almost a mantra in Israel). Until October 2000, I still believed it was possible to change discriminatory laws but keep the basic Zionist structure of a Jewish state. The violence of the police and the murder of the 13 shocked me into realising that non-Jews would always be second class citizens as long as the state continued to be defined as Jewish, that the discrimination was intrinsic. Once I had realised that, I began to see even the consistent underfunding of Palestinian municipalities, education, etc. in a different light – not as something to be corrected in the next budget (always the next budget), but as a symptom of a much bigger problem.

16 Shmuel November 11, 2009 at 2:10 am

Messed up the tags. The first paragraph is a quote from tr. The rest is mine.

17 MRW November 11, 2009 at 2:34 am

Shmuel, your morality is exemplary. Must be boring to keep hearing this, but I am impressed.

Previous post: Goldstone’s Brandeis debate with Dore Gold to be online

Next post: After Gaza, the lobby lost 46 votes in Congress