‘NYT’ says Netanyahu is trespassing in our politics

To its credit, the Times faults Netanyahu in its editorial on the peace process today. I was shocked by the news in this editorial that Hillary Clinton spent 7 hours with Netanyahu on Thursday. What’s that about? Isn’t it time to freeze Netanyahu? This is reminiscent of the fact revealed in Clayton Swisher’s Camp David book that Ehud Barak had an open line to Bill Clinton throughout 2000. And why was that, do you think? An election year, in which Hillary was running for New York Senate. This is why the peace process is doomed in its present form, structurally undermined by the conservative Jewish prominence in the Establishment… Even The Times knows that Netanyahu is trespassing in our politics, giving speeches all over the U.S.:

[He is] counting on his newly empowered Republican allies on Capitol Hill to back him up, no matter what he does. Since last week’s American elections, Mr. Netanyahu’s government has published plans for 1,000 new housing units

Yes and why does he have this power? The Times warns that if this process fails, extremists will take over. Excuse me but if Netanyahu is coddling his coalition– loyalty oaths, transfer, second-class citizenship– those are extremists, getting blind support from the American Jewish leadership.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Israel/Palestine | Tagged , , , , , ,

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

  1. Gellian says:

    Phil,

    You are hitting at a point that at long last is seeming inevitable.

    The United States cannot, will never be able to, lead the peace process. The fact that a Jewish population in the U.S. equal to that in Israel resides and votes here — and this is to leave aside issues of wealth or influence — means that the U.S. is and will always be functionally an extension of Israel.

    Those of goodwill here in the U.S. should recognize that us trying to lead this process is as bad as, say, Jordan or Egypt or Saudi Arabia trying to lead it. The opposing side will never trust it.

    I nominate a country with no special dog in this fight. How about Japan?

    • Citizen says:

      There are as many Muslims in the US as Jews. The connection of wealth to political influence is recognized by all analysts, if not by SCOTUS and the average American (who do recognize it generally but not as it pertains to foreign policy in the Middle East. And this leaves aside the issue of extreme bias when it comes to Israel on the part of our MSM. No very wealthy Arab could buy our congress, he or she was a dual citizen, because of the way Arabs have been painted historically by Hollywood (the “sheik of Arabi,” into your tent he’ll creep), and in the MSM apropos Israel’s 1973 war and the consequential Arab Oil Boycott followed by lines at the American gas pumps. The image that has stuck is of the faboulously wealthy sheik bleeding the US dry to enable his personal pleasures. How about Finland?

      • RoHa says:

        OT, but when that song was written, it was a woman’s dream to have a Sheikh of Araby creeping into her tent.

        link to en.wikipedia.org

      • Bandolero says:

        It’s not so easy to find an independent country to solve the conflict.

        - Japan is a client state of the US, since it’s occupied since WWII and therefore the Israel-Lobby has lot’s of influuence on it
        - Finland is a Christian state with a strong Israel lobby and the country, which sent the man into IAEA who forged the case against Iran in favor to Israel.

        Maybe China would be an alost ideal country to solve the IP issue. But China has not much interest in investing political capital to solve this conflict without any results in reach. As the conflict and the US support for this apartheid regime weakens the US standing world wide, China is rightful to leave the task for the US, and it’s not dishonest, that China harvests the fruits falling to the ground in the diplomatic fallout of the US misbehaviour – like oil contracts with Iran and Iraq. China gains international ground against the US as a result of this ongoing conflict.

        The soultion of the conflict is quite clear. The UN has numerous votes with results such as 150:3 that Israel must withdraw out of all territory which is not in it’s internationally recognized borders, ie the Green Line. In the end, it’s the US, the EU, Canada and Australia that ignore international law and give Israel the money and weapons it needs to suppress Palestinians in the occupied territories.

        So nobody can solve this conflict anyway, if that doesn’t end.

        It seems to be that backers of Obama have seen the liability Israel, too, and so Obama tries to freeze settlements. But as the Christian armageddon sects are the main backers of the Zionists regime, and this support is not eligable to logic, Obama has no power over his policies and needs to follow the orders of Netanyahu. Let’s see now, if the shift in New York Times is permanent. I doubt it.

        I suppose, the reason, why the New York Times was printing this attack on Netanyahu, is that their censor was just sleeping.

    • potsherd says:

      The fact that a Jewish population in the U.S. equal to that in Israel resides and votes here — and this is to leave aside issues of wealth or influence —

      Gellian, the problem is not the voting Jewish population, the problem is precisely the wealth and influence. While the majority of the Jewish voters lean left, the wealth and influence overwhelms it on the right. The increasing concentration of Jews in Congress do not represent their Jewish constituents on this issue, they represent the Lobby, that pays them.

      • “Gellian, the problem is not the voting Jewish population, the problem is precisely the wealth and influence. While the majority of the Jewish voters lean left, the wealth and influence overwhelms it on the right”

        Were the Jewish frat boys and girls from NY/NJ/Conn that were partying in Israel at night screeching ‘Fuck Obama’ wealthy? Were the thousands of Jews in New Orleans busy reloading their hasbara wealthy? How about the Orthodox in Brooklyn who fuel the psycho-settlers? Please.

        The mindset of American Jews is the problem; the money, in this climate, is nearly irrelevant. As for left-leaning voting tendencies, Progressive Except for Palestine is the phrase that leaps to mind.

        (BTW: Why was this post modded away the first time?)

    • RoHa says:

      Japan still depends on those tankers full of oil. I suggest Bhutan.

    • Sumud says:

      I nominate a country with no special dog in this fight. How about Japan?

      How about no country?

      The “peace process” should be abandoned altogether. It only ever existed because Israel wanted to circumvent international law.

      No other country has to step in and solve the problem, the US just has to stop vetoing SC resolutions and let the international system (UN) function effectively. The outcome would be the imposition of sanctions on Israel until they moderated their behaviour (ie. ended the occupation and withdrew to the pre-’67 line).

      For that matter, the SC veto really should be abolished entirely.

  2. Avi says:

    Suppose for a moment that netanyahu was ejected from his prime ministerial seat and replaced. Does anyone truly think that will somehow change Israel’s policy on anything related to civil and human rights?

    loyalty oaths, transfer, second-class citizenship

    To some, these might seem like a direct consequence of the netanyahu government, but the fact of the matter is that second class citizenship has existed since the founding of the state and was certainly in place under Olmert’s government. The same goes for Israeli domestic debates on Transfer. Transfer isn’t an invention of Avigdor Lieberman’s. It has long been on the table dating back to Ben-Gurion, Sharon and so on.

    The only new development in recent years is this so-called loyalty oath, but it, too, existed under a different banner throughout Israel’s sordid history.

    Besides, what difference would it make whether the loyalty oath were instituted or not? Palestinians in Israel have always been segregated and discriminated against. Military service has for at least two decades been the excuse used to refuse employment, whether for menial jobs like waiting tables or otherwise. Those who work in the Jewish sector (Remember that Israel is a segregated society) are the exception, not the rule.

  3. annie says:

    What Mr. Netanyahu does not seem to realize is that a peace deal with the Palestinians is not a favor to President Obama. It is vital to Israel’s long-term security.

    say it again and again and again.

  4. Citizen says:

    Seven hours with Nettie, and Hillary has nothing to say to the American public except the same tired cliches. This speaks volumes. What the heck did they do for seven hours? Plan Hillary’s future political career? Exchange details on just how they promise to help each other with their respective political ambitions, going through various scenarios? Can anyone think of anything else they could have spent 7 hours on? She didn’t even need to meet him to toss out her usual bland and cautious statements in the matter heralded to be addressed. Perhaps she ironed out how she’d push for many more gifts to Nettie’s regime, so he could sprinkle those toys to his
    constituents?

  5. yourstruly says:

    What I got from this NYT is how easy it is to buy off the PA – a measly 150 million, compared to the bribe that the settler-state’s being offered. Meanwhile, not a word about the dual loyalty members of the President’s WH team and of Congress. Instead, we get weekly obituary pages with the names of 10-12 American soldiers (mostly from small town and inner city USA) killed in Afghanistan, compliments of Israel’s intransigence vis a vis a Mideast peace agreement. An ntransigence which, according to recent statements by General David Petreaus, Vice President Joe Biden, among others, endangers our troops in Afghanistan as well as our own national security. Add to this the Obana administration’s latest betrayal of us here in the homeland – it’s plan to tear up what’s left of the safety net, leaving most of us dreamless, adrift the undertow. Wake-up call, America, the time is now!

    • Keith says:

      YOURSTRULY- Are you suggesting that the primary reason the people of Afghanistan oppose US storm troopers destroying and occupying their country is because of Israeli intransigence in the Middle East peace talks? An interesting perspective to say the least.

      • yourstruly says:

        Not the only reason but a reason. Not my words, as stated above, but those of top U.S. government leaders.

        • Keith says:

          YOURSTRULY- I would suggest that the way to respond to resistance to US storm troopers is to bring our forces of occupation home, close down most or all of our overseas bases, and slash the military budget. I don’t see the resolution of the Israel/Palestine situation as being the key factor in ameliorating the sorrows of empire. Of course, ending support for Israel would be part of getting the US out of the empire business. Unfortunately, we continue to head in the wrong direction, pressing for increased neoliberal globalization and militarism, a day of reckoning soon to occur. No doubt General Petreaus has a different opinion on these matters.

        • yonira says:

          C’mon Keith, you can blame Israel for anything. But God forbid you blame those who actually pulled the trigger or set off the IED.

        • Keith says:

          YONIRA- Unlike you, I don’t blame the victims of US/Israeli aggression for resisting the aggression. The problem is the aggression, not the resistance. Citizen pressure needs to be brought to bear on the US/Israeli elites to cease their aggression in the Middle East and elsewhere.

        • yourstruly says:

          Keith, you’re right and our task is to end both U.S. and Israeli aggression. They’re linked, though, which means we go after both of them at the same time. There’s a special interest, one might say, in Jews going after Israel, in that the settler-state and its supporters keep insisting that they speak for Jews everywhere. This has an effect on some people who, otherwise, would be sympathetic to the Palestinian’s plight; namely, not getting involved for fear of being called either an antisemite or self-hating Jew. The more Jewish-Americans stand up for justice in Palestine, the more those who have been holding back will feel free to stand up for Palestine. At the same time, of course, the antiwar movement must be revived. Remember, we’re a part of it. Adelante, BDS, so that 2012 turns into the year of Palestine with Israel (not its people) put into the dustbin of history, whereupon Empire-USA will be so weakened that its perpetual wars (Empire itself, actually) will be headed for that same waste basket.

  6. Jim Haygood says:

    ‘Seven hours, including at least two hours in which Mr. Netanyahu and Mrs. Clinton met alone in a suite at the Loews Regency Hotel.’ — NYT

    Too late for pillow talk to rescue these doomed negotiations, I’d say.

    • potsherd says:

      As well as: link to salon.com

      And Greenwald is MUCH more influential than Sullivan. Methinks the Zionists have overreached.

      Of course, to a Republican, betraying the US President is not treason when the President is Democrat.

      • MRW says:

        That Glenn Greenwald article about Cantor is superb. It may give some other reporter the balls to go after it. Cantor is clearly in violation of the Logan Act.

      • Antidote says:

        “I can’t remember an opposition leader telling a foreign leader, in a personal meeting, that he would side, as a policy, with that leader against the president. Certainly, in statements on one specific issue or another — building in Jerusalem, or somesuch — lawmakers have taken the sides of other nations. But to have-a-face to face and say, in general, we will take your side against the White House — that sounds to me extraordinary.”

        For contrast, try something remotely like this is Israel – such as Arab MK Zoabi (not an opposition leader of course) being a passenger on a humanitarian aid ship to break the Gaza blockade (not aiming at friendly talks with Hamas and not even ever reaching foreign soil), and you are accused of treason and felony and stripped of your rights.

  7. RoHa says:

    (And kudos on putting “NYT” in the headline.)

  8. On the Clinton- (Ehud) Barak relationship, I don’t find the relationship itself backward, particularly because Clinton worked hard to put Barak into office, sending Carville to Israel to help get the Israeli public to support supplanting Netanyahu with Barak. The problem was not the relationship but the lack of results. Camp David was a mistake, poorly prepared for, doomed to fail, sufficient to start an intifadeh lacking only ignition by a match which wasn’t long in arriving. If Hillary’s run for the Senate inclined Clinton towards Camp David without proper preparation (and clearly Clinton and the sides were unprepared) then it was not the phone connection to Barak but the lack of preparation and professionalimst that were to blame.