Steve Walt has a post saying George Mitchell should resign because there is nothing for him to do in the Obama administration, and that the U.S. will be judged harshly for our role in sustaining the Israeli occupation that has destroyed the two-state-solution.
How harshly will we be judged? One fears more violence. From Glenn Greenwald on Osama’s latest tape:
Bin Laden also warns the US there will be more attacks if it continues to support Israel. . . . Directly addressing Americans, [bin Laden] says: "It is unfair you enjoy a safe life while our brothers in Gaza suffer greatly . . . . Our attacks will continue as long as you support Israel. . . . America will never dream of security unless we will have it in reality in Palestine."
Greenwald goes on to argue that Al Qaeda has never really cared about the Palestinians, just repeatedly given them lip service. I think this is a misleading argument. As Mike Kinsley once wrote, If something is a factor– in this case in Osama’s twisted mind– then who’s to say it’s not the determinative factor? I wonder if Greenwald is fearful of backlash. But some of this backlash is strictly political: aimed at the lobby. A little while ago I came up with a provocative Daisy ad: It killed Bobby Kennedy… it blew up the World Trade Center… it got us into the Iraq War… It killed 13 people at Fort Hood… It just blew up a CIA station, killing 7 agents… It’s our special relationship with Israel. When will you say, Enough?
Is it really so outrageous to make such an argument, when the special relationship continues to dominate our policy and when it denies grievances that are so obvious to the rest of the world?
I think Greenwald’s argument (your summary of it) that Al Quaida is using the Palestinian suffering for its own PR is convincing and accurate.
It is related to the notion that everything that occurs in the Islamic land is to be controlled by Islam, and that infidels are unwelcome in any respect.
It considers Israel as part of the Islamic world, and that to accept Israel in any manner, is to betray Koran. And, that Koran compels holy war on enemies and collaborators for even a conciliatory interpretation.
There is no modern US or European behavior that would fulfill Al Quaida’s criteria. You are naive, careless and prospectively cowardly to suggest regarding their logic as controlling US policy.
Your first line is accurate, Witty–unfortunately you then throw your own interpretation onto Greenwald’s sensible one.
Greenwald is saying that just because Al Qaeda leaders claim to be outraged by Palestinian suffering doesn’t mean we have to take their claims at face value. Maybe they’re sincere, but it’s a twisted sort of sincerity coming from a group that is perfectly happy slaughtering Muslim civilians for its own cause (unless, as some seem to realize, it hurts their own base of support among Muslims). Osama bin Laden claiming to care about Palestinian suffering is like George Bush claiming to care about Mideast democracy. In some sense they might both be “sincere”, but it’s a deeply twisted sincerity at best.
OTOH, Greenwald agrees that our policy of supporting Israel no matter what does attract recruits for terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda. He is often critical of the US press for ignoring how our policies, including our kneejerk support for Israel, contributes to the support given to terrorists.
I got that about Greenwald, and I agree with the impression about Al Quaida’s sincerity.
Al Quaida is not conditional though, and ANY support of Israel is stimulus for its terror and PR efforts.
It is off the scale. There is a grey line that the left often ignore, that Phil often ignores, shifts over to pandering to Al Quaida arguments.
The issue is not and never has been Osama’s sincerity. The issue is the occupation and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. What makes it so difficult to comprehend that fact?
Right after 9/11 Bin Laden offered two justifications for that attack: (1) USA policy on Iraq. (2) USA policy on Israel.
The chief architect of 9/11 specifically mentioned USA rubber-stamping Israel as his main motive. The 9/11 Commission knew this; it erased the specificity from the horse’s mouth, merely referring to the general notion that foreign policy impact is a natural motive for those impacted.
The unfair and criminal treatment of the hapless Palestinians by Israel and its enabler, the hypocritical USA resonates around the world, especially the Muslim world. Other declared motives
by Al Quaida and other Muslim groups do not. Al Quaida has never been able
to make an inroad into Hamas. Obama’s initial decision to halt the settlements
as the first step towards an earnest peace was well targeted–if it had been pursued
with more than Cairo rhetoric it would have taken out a lot of sympathy for
the official terrorists, hence deprived Al Quaida and other groups of that ilk of
their claimed high road. Otherwise, the West’s “war on Terror” is left with
Might Makes Right as its unmasked ethical imperative for all the world to see–as the world does see.
link to npr.org
link to npr.org
Islamophobe much?
“It killed Bobby Kennedy… it blew up the World Trade Center… it got us into the Iraq War… It killed 13 people at Fort Hood… It just blew up a CIA station, killing 7 agents… It’s our special relationship with Israel. When will you say, Enough?”
Your proposed daisy ad would be a total disaster. Your ad could be spun and would be spun and practically begs to be spun as a form of cowardice and as borderline anti-semitism. Don’t help our noble allies in the Mideast, because it makes the evil terrorists hate us and why should we die for a bunch of , well, you know, Those People. That’s how it sounds.
The fact is that Israel is not our noble democratic ally–they are our ignoble, apartheid-democracy ally guilty of massive human rights violations. You have to emphasize that. If instead you say “We support Israel and as a result we are attacked by terrorists” you sound like an appeaser. I suppose you think political arguments have to appeal to people’s basest instincts, but you if want to sink to that level you better be happy with the kind of support you’re likely to get. And prepare for the obvious attacks.
We can speculate as to Greenwald’s reasoning here, but the fact remains that foreign intervention and, historically, imperial designs, play a major role in shaping the views of people in the region, from North Africa to Iraq and even Iran.
It’s all part of the collective memory of the region’s native people. In other words, there doesn’t have to be a direct and pronounced connection between Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians and bin Laden’s (and his followers’) reasoning, on the one hand and the pan-Arab/Muslim view of the Israeli Palestinian conflict, on the other hand.
Greenwald is reluctant to acknowledge that regardless of bin Laden’s stated aims, the grievances (i.e. US Israel relations and policy toward Palestinians) are legitimate had they existed in a vacuum. But, Greenwald seems unwilling to make the connection for fear of appearing to approve or agree or even justify bin Laden’s goals.
I think Greenwald made a wise decision. Had he made that connection, he would have inadvertently contributed to delegitimizing the concerns regarding US/Israeli foreign policy in the region.
On a side note, it’s difficult to define organizations and their stated goals (re: bin Laden), when disinformation and propaganda are used by governments to either exagerate or diminsh from “al-Qaeda” depending on the interests de jur.
For example, does al-Qaeda really exist in the capacity and reach various governments claim? When news media report that “al-Qaeda” or groups associated with it were responsible for one attack or another, can we say for sure if that’s truly the case? In the last few years, “al-Qaeda” has purportedly attacked civilians in market places and shopping centers in Morocco, Algiers, Egypt, Jordan, and the far east. Is it possible that they are all linked? Yes. Is it possible that they are not linked, and that several of these attacks were actually a result of local conflicts or local politics? Yes.
“Is it really so outrageous to make such an argument”.
In terms of logic, I don’t think so. In terms of political effectiveness, I’m not certain. Clearly the lobby did work very hard at the outset to submerge any connection between 9/11 and our policies, and claims to be outraged–witness Giuliani’s outburst at Ron Paul in the spring debate of 2008, the most interesting moment in the campaign– at any hint of it. Perhaps that’s based on their fear that this bit of truth would begin to unravel the entire war-or-terror/Israel-is-our -best- friend -ever rationale. That if Americans perceived that Israeli settlements were the reason for hassles at airports and big budget deficits and the possibility of further terror, they would say no to the settlements.
But I think they in fact overestimate the realpolitik impulses of the American people, and that in fact any seeming appeasement of Al Qaeda would be so difficult, both morally and politically, that no politician could do it. It’s close, but on balance I’d say Obama did a favor for Netanyahu with that last broadcast.
I’m troubled by these two trends that are being carried out behind the distracting smoke of “OMG the Dems don’t have a majority in Senate” and “Israel is single-handedly saving Haiti.” –
1. Lots of chatter, cryptic reporting, and, most troubling of all, denials by Israel that Israel is planning an attack on Lebanon. Phil wrote about it a week or so ago; since then several reports of Israeli airplanes/drones buzzing South Lebanon; Israeli patrols tramping across the border into Lebanon, etc. What’s going on?
2. Reports say that Israel will soon take delivery from Germany of a submarine that, German sources say, will likely be armed with nuclear warheads. Israel’s plan for the sub is to patrol the Persian Gulf.
3. Supposedly dovish orgs like J-Street/Brit Tzedek had overtly intertwined Obama’s success with Health Care Reform with ‘success ‘ at achieving 2-state solution. On Wednesday, with the election of Brown in Mass., HCR stepped backward. On Thursday, Obama made a pathetic statement:
~Israel is out of control.
~Obama has lost control.
~Having mulled the step for several months, in the wake of the assassination of one of its scientists, Iran is rescinding subsidies link to wsws.org
— ie, the Iranian government, ever fearful of an attack from outside, is preparing its people for just that eventuality.
On each move, the winner is Israel, the losers are Israelis, Palestinians, Americans, Iranians.
Why is this being tolerated by the rest of the world?
correction: Osama did favor for Netanyahu…
Osama is probably dead, and the tape is probably a fake.
“It killed Bobby Kennedy”
Someone behind him fired the shots that killed him. Sirhan Sirhan was in front of him.
I’m a great fan of Glenzilla, but I also read, very faithfully, Juan Cole at Informed Comment, who does a great job of denigrating the latest Bin Laden tape.
The Irrelevance of Bin Ladin – link to juancole.com
(you’ll have to scroll down)
Fake, almost certainly. The fellow has been dead for at least 9 years, and his Saudi business wealth no longer sustains any ‘terror group’ called Al Qaida.
Money quote from Juan: “As of 1200 GMT on 24 January, jihadist websites monitored by OSC have not been observed to post the Bin Ladin audio statement released on an Arab media website and filed as GMP20100124635002.’ OSC is the US government Open Source Center, which monitors radical Muslim web sites.
If genuine jihadist sites don’t publish it, what’s it worth?
In any case, Al Qaida, as a group, was invented by the US, during the prosecutions of those involved in the Kenya embassy bombings in early 2001, long before 9/11. It was essential, for certain legal reasons, to show that the accused belonged to an organised group
Psychopathic god You exaggerate the importance of Israelis overflying Lebanon right now.
They’ve been doing this with impunity since the 1970s, when I saw them low-flying over my Beirut apartment. But then they were shooting, at Palestinian refugee camps. They also used to ‘buzz’ the main runway at very low level, at the new Queen Alia International Airport in Jordan, as it was being constructed, just to show who was boss.
Lebanon has no known anti-aircraft weapons; I hope Hizbollah gets some, soon, so maybe they can inhibit the bombing spree that Israel’s IAF undertook in 2006, destroying major civilian infrastructure, in psychopathic detail, all over the country.
How funny. Though all the tapes originated in Pakistan, which has four modern TV stations – these tapes are always aired by Al-Jazeer, based in Qatar, the headquarters to largest foreign military base. Most analyst believe that Osama Bin laden died in 2002 most probably of kidney failure. But, Al-Qaeda being a USrael asset – the OBL myth has to be kept alive to change the map of the Muslim world in the Middle East and Asia to the satisfaction of the Zionist regime.
Bin Laden is Alive!
link to rehmat1.wordpress.com