TNR says, ‘Talk to Hamas’

on 5 Comments

The true sign of the poverty of American journalism. It takes the New Republic and an Israeli hawk to run an important piece urging Israel to talk to Hamas, that’s where any deal lies. So, where has the American left been? The Democratic Party? Deferring to conventional Jewish opinion, that’s where; deferring to the lobby. Piece is authored by Efraim Halevy, former head of the Mossad and national security adviser to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

Remember that in Iraq our Democratic politicians said that we had to talk to the terrorists, it is a political dispute; but here they are mute. Imagine if Petraeus said, Talk to Hamas! Why isn’t Chris Matthews pushing on this all the time? Because he’s scared to say a word out of school.

And here’s a comment from the New Republic site:

This discussion belongs in Hebrew in Israel. It does not belong in English abroad. One suspect Halevy moves the discussion here because he has failed to convince the Israeli polity and wishes, like J-Street, to circumvent that failure by using foreigners to over-ride Israeli democracy.

That’s another window on the Israel lobby. Don’t disagree in front of the goyim. h/t James North.

5 Responses

  1. Pamela Olson
    April 2, 2010, 12:30 am

    It’s a small start, but it’s a start. Truth and reason are always seeking to bust through. Looks like they’ve found a small outlet.

    Prelude to a deluge. Inshallah.

  2. Peter in SF
    April 2, 2010, 2:29 am


    When the Israeli cabinet recently designated two sites in Hebron and Bethlehem to be preserved as national heritage landmarks, the PA joined Hamas in issuing inflammatory statements exhorting the populace to demonstrate against the Jewish appropriation of Muslim holy sites. Stone throwing and violence quickly ensued. Abu Mazen, the self-styled moderate president of the PA, provocatively warned of an impending religious war. Only a stern warning sent by Israeli security authorities brought the “moderate” Palestinian leadership to its senses. And even then, it was only the Israelis who were capable of becalming Jerusalem and the West Bank, with sustained and daily operations in Palestinian-controlled areas. In a time of crisis, the shortcomings of the ruling Palestinians were exposed.

    Call me naïve, but to me it sounds as if the shortcomings of the ruling Israelis were exposed by the fact that this crisis happened in this first place.

    • pabelmont
      April 2, 2010, 8:30 am

      “Shortcomings of the ruling Israelis ” ? Common, you gotta be kidding.

      This announcement of new Israeli “national heritages” (recalling that the “nation” means the so-called Jewish people”) in places beloved by Palestinians is a deliberate provocation well in line with many other Israeli steps (settlements, house demolition, expulsions, killings, the-boss-has-gone-mad excessive (and illegal) warfare) intended to state, state again, re-state, and then state again that Israel is “here” to stay and that “here” is wherever Israel wants it to be.

      So this is part of policy, and by no means a “shortcoming.” The US response is presumably to ignore it, in line with long-standing US policy to never-say-NO to Israel, and thus also not a “shortcoming”.

      After all, we need a sense of perspective here.

  3. potsherd
    April 2, 2010, 7:31 am

    “Sustained and daily operations” are not the way to “becalm” a region but to inflame it. Which is probably what Israel has in mind. When Palestinians react to their provocations, Israel can cry “terrorism.”

  4. potsherd
    April 2, 2010, 7:35 am

    The party most adamant against talking to Hamas is the Obama administration. They are wedded to their quisling Abbas and convinced that any advantage to Hamas makes their puppet look bad in comparison. It was reportedly the US that convinced BYahoo to cancel the Gilad Shalit deal, as this would bolster the image of Hamas.

    I am not convinced that this is entirely AIPAC influence. It smells more like a Petraeus tactic.

Leave a Reply