The Netanyahu government used to be against the liberal Zionist lobbying group J Street. The Israelis said J Street was anti-Israel, here. And Netanyahu refused to meet with a congressional delegation that J Street organized, and the Israeli embassy boycotted the J Street conference in 2011.
Times have changed. J Street’s head Jeremy Ben-Ami sent out an email after a recent trip to Israel by a J Street delegation, stating:
Finally, the Netanyahu government allowed ministers and senior political figures to meet with J Street on this trip, including Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin (the highest-ranking government officials at the ministry) and Minister Yuval Steinitz.
The government put out the word to journalists following these meetings that “Israel is moving closer to J Street” in recognition “that J Street has become a major player in the US political arena which can no longer be ignored.” (See this clip from Israel’s leading daily newspaper, Yediot Ahronot.)Conclusion
Our trip confirmed that Kerry has re-injected energy into peace efforts and that the coming months will put to the test J Street’s core hypothesis that vigorous American engagement and leadership could be the key factor in bringing about an end to this most difficult conflict.
The shift in policy [visavis J Street] can be seen in the context of Israel’s efforts to tighten relations with the Obama administration and restart negotiations with the Palestinians.
What does J Street get out of being Netanyahu’s figleaf? Power, access, money– the traditional aims of a lobbying organization. Many cynics said long ago that J Street was AIPAC-lite; and their view seems borne out by these events. J Street began as an organization that opposed the settlement program; it then morphed into an organization that pushed for fixing borders (inside Palestine) that would allow Israel to maintain a Jewish majority. Its overarching aim is to secure and redeem the Jewish state.
ptooey.
(I acknowledge that I am being puerile, but it’s the best I can come up with right now)
I haven’t followed the organization, so I’m not clear as to what is implied by “J Street … pushed for fixing borders (inside Palestine) that would allow Israel to maintain a Jewish majority,” w/ no references provided. Is “Palestine” referring to historic Palestine, and “borders” to the pre-1967 ones? Is this a complaint about their advocacy for the internationally-recognized 2-state-sol’n?
What does J Street get out of being Netanyahu’s figleaf? Power, access, money — the traditional aims of a lobbying organization.
This fits more than the last sentence of the same paragraph. The last sentence is a “great if you can do it” thing because if there was peace, there would be little use for AIPAC or J Street.
The government put out the word to journalists following these meetings that “Israel is moving closer to J Street” in recognition “that J Street has become a major player in the US political arena which can no longer be ignored.”
And the government also let it be known that Zionism is moving closer to assimilation in recognition that Gentiles have become major players in the US political arena too. In other completely disingenuous news . . .
J Street has adopted a political agenda and platform that looks like warmed-over AIPAC rubbish.
J Street is not Netanyahu’s figleaf, John Kerry is Netanyahu’s figleaf and J Street is Kerry’s friend and ally. If Kerry leaves town disappointed, saying that he has given up, and if he blames Netanyahu, a la, Kissinger and Ford and “reassessment” then J street will not be there to help Netanyahu, they are part of Kerry’s game plan and as long as Kerry and Netanyahu are on the same page, J street and Netanyahu are on the same page.