American Jewish leaders are mad that settlement-boosting minister exposed their charade

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 82 Comments
Bennett
Israeli Economy Minister Naftali Bennett speaking at an Israel Project debate earlier this year. (Photo: The Israel Project/Wikimedia Commons)

Naftali Bennett’s blunt truth about the death of the two-state solution has ticked off American Jewish leaders. The right-wing settlement-boosting Economy Minister’s comments earlier this week struck at the heart of the charade that the American Jewish establishment, in concert with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have kept up: that Israel is interested in a peace settlement based on a two-state solution.

In other words, Bennett had the gall to say what smart observers know but what the American Jewish establishment wants unspoken: Israel is intent on controlling all of historic Palestine forever.

“The idea that a Palestinian state will be formed in the land of Israel has come to a dead end,” Bennett said in the most fitting of places: a settlement conference in Jerusalem. “Everyone who wanders around Judea and Samaria knows that what they say in the corridors of Annapolis and Oslo is detached from reality. Today there are 400,000 Israeli residents of Judea and Samaria and another 250,000 in eastern Jerusalem.”

Bennett’s comments were only the latest from Netanyahu’s coalition to pronounce the idea of a Palestinian state dead. Last week, Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon told the Times of Israel that the Israeli coalition would block any two-state deal.

As settlement expansion continues, this truth will only sink in deeper and deeper. But American Jewish leaders are busy distancing themselves from the right-wing coalition’s positions.

Rabbi Rick Jacobs, head of the Union for Reform Judaism, told Haaretz yesterday that Bennett wasn’t really speaking for the Israeli government!

“These are all irresponsible statements which do not in any way reflect the commitment of the Israeli government, not to mention the long-standing position of the U.S., that the two-state solution is the only possible solution.” 

And American Jewish Committee director David Harris slammed the Economy Minister:

“Minister Naftali Bennett’s remarks, rejecting outright the vision of two states for two peoples, are stunningly shortsighted.”

As Mairav Zonszein pointed out on The Daily Beast’s Open Zion blog, this was a rare American Jewish condemnation of a leading Israeli politician; the Jewish establishment usually follows the Israeli government’s lead.

Why the eagerness to condemn Bennett, departing from normal practice? Harris said it himself: “Bennett’s alternative scenario offers only the prospect of a dead-end strategy of endless conflict and growing isolation for Israel.” The words “growing isolation for Israel” are key.

As Jamie Stern-Weiner writes in Le Monde Diplomatique, the drive for a two-state solution has “never been about achieving a resolution of the conflict, which can only happen on terms all Israeli governments have rejected. Rather, their primary function has been to reduce international pressure on Israel without it having to make political concessions.”

If that charade of a peace process for a two-state solution–backed by American Jewish leaders–disappears, Israel and its supporters are in trouble.

That’s what the American Jewish establishment wants to prevent. The existence of a “peace process” and rhetoric supporting the two-state solution are crucial fig-leaves to deflect international condemnation of Israel. It’s why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues to offer his support for a two-state solution–though on terms no Palestinian leader could accept. He needs to mouth the words “Palestinian state” every so often to keep his relationship with American Jewish leaders and the U.S. government smooth, while at the same time presiding over actions that kill the solution he claims to support.

There’s a good reason, though, why Netanyahu won’t make real moves towards a two-state solution. The Israeli public wants nothing to do with it.

+972 Magazine’s Dahlia Scheindlin recently reported on a poll from Ariel University, showing how “the majority of Israeli Jews inside the Green Line are still basically wedded to settlements and barely register that they pose a problem.” Here’s some of the numbers: 54 percent of Israeli Jews believe the settlements are legal; and a plurality of 46 percent say the settlements provide a security “band” for Israel. Another poll conducted by the Jerusalem Post earlier this month showed that 74% of Israelis reject a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem. 

The numbers mean that the Israeli public is fully comfortable with the current status quo–a status quo that means more settlements that will kill any chance for a viable Palestinian state.

Bennett is speaking for those Israelis. Netanyahu himself wrote in 1993 that a Palestinian state would be disastrous for Israel, and though he continues that policy today, he has to watch his language. 

And the American Jewish establishment keeps clinging to Netanyahu’s current rhetoric about a demilitarized Palestinian state. Without that rhetoric, they’d be left drowning in the reality of the current Israel/Palestine situation: permanent Israeli control over millions of non-Jews. How would they able to sell that?

82 Responses

  1. Ramzi Jaber
    June 20, 2013, 2:45 pm

    1S1P1V.

    Benett, Bogie, Bibi. All the same. All liars. All criminals. All thieves. All murderers. All colonialists.

    1S1P1V. ICC/ICJ.

    • seafoid
      June 20, 2013, 11:48 pm

      All deluded. Kulhum munafiqeen. All wrong.
      All going to get a big shock when TSHTF.

  2. seafoid
    June 20, 2013, 2:48 pm

    74% of israelis reject east jerusalem as capital of palestine. 74% of israelis translates as over 90% of israeli jews.

    Wullahi.

    • ckg
      June 20, 2013, 4:26 pm

      The jpost poll is of Jews only. Arabs are marginalised.

      • seafoid
        June 20, 2013, 5:10 pm

        Well then it’s not 74% of Israelis.
        Jew is not equal to Israeli. There is Yossi Israeli and there is Mohammed Israeli.

      • piotr
        June 21, 2013, 4:07 pm

        Iam not sure if there are any Israelis. Israel has Jewish citizens, Muslim citizens etc., and there was one person who sued for a decade to get an identity card stating “Israeli”, but he recently died.

    • tree
      June 20, 2013, 4:31 pm

      Actually, the 74% comes from a poll of Jewish Israelis, so the number stays the same. Obviously for the JP poll only the opinions of Jewish Israelis count, thus the article elides Israelis and Jewish Israelis as if they are exactly the same cohort.

      • ckg
        June 20, 2013, 8:18 pm

        @tree Exactly.

    • mondonut
      June 20, 2013, 5:30 pm

      seafoid says: 74% of israelis reject east jerusalem as capital of palestine.
      ======================================================
      Disappointing. I would have thought the number to be higher.

    • doug
      June 20, 2013, 5:54 pm

      I see this all the time in Israeli polls and references. The term “Israelis” is often used as a synonym for Israeli Jews. The biggest exception to this is when Israeli leaders want to tout the Only Democracy in the Middle East.

      • seafoid
        June 21, 2013, 12:16 am

        link to tinyurl.com

        “As far as Arabs are concerned, if you don’t give them the right to vote, you don’t have a demographic problem,”

        says retired general Effi Eitam

        “One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.”
        — Rabbi Yaacov Perrin

        link to nytimes.com

        I guess there is no point in mentioning what the fingernail thinks.

      • German Lefty
        June 21, 2013, 10:11 am

        Listen to what Israeli “human rights lawyer” Michael Sfard says.
        Question: “What would you tell people who say that the two-state solution is dead?”
        link to youtube.com
        Question: “In a two-state solution, what should happen to the settlers in the West Bank?”
        link to youtube.com
        He claims that advocates of a non-Zionist one-state solution are irresponsible.
        He totally downplays the importance of the right of return and claims that the settlements are by far the biggest obstacle to peace.
        He only wants to allow a few Palestinian refugees to return to Israel. He denies these Palestinian refugees Israeli citizenship and want to downgrade them to “permanent residents”. He equates Palestinians in Israel with Jewish settlers in the West Bank.

    • ckg
      June 20, 2013, 8:46 pm

      I’ve taken Jodi Rudoren at NY Times to task for quoting poll results of *Israelis* when the results were actually of Jewish Israelis. Perhaps she is ill-informed. Israeli media–including JP–continually observe this vile practice. What better example of societal acceptance of Jim Crow is there than this?

  3. Nevada Ned
    June 20, 2013, 2:53 pm

    For decades the Palestinians have been imprisoned by a process started by right-wing Israeli prime minister Begin. Israel never has to commit to leaving the Occupied Territories.

    The whole premise is this: a Jewish state in Palestine is something that every one must accept.
    But a Palestinian state in Palestine? Very dubious. Menace to Israel, etc. etc.

    And ever since 1967 Israel has been colonizing the Occupied Territories. The results of Israeli opinion polls has varied over the decades, as have the political complexion of the various Israeli governments. But the Israeli settlement “industry” has never stopped, whatever the opinion poll or whatever the make up of the Israel government.

    • seafoid
      June 20, 2013, 3:12 pm

      The bots have this notion that history is over and they can do what they goddamn want in their sovereign state and that if they are suitably vague for long enough they’ll get that last 22% of real estate they wanted from the start. I guess there is a huge dollop of belief that God made this happen and the Shoah is somehow involved.

      Sorry people but that is all arseways.
      And empire doesn’t work like the Bible says.
      And it doesn’t matter if your cousin has a pad in the Hamptons.

      If Carlsberg made religions to run states they probably wouldn’t replicate rabbinical Judaism.

      • Citizen
        June 20, 2013, 6:14 pm

        Interesting to compare the Israel situation with the Timmerman trial.

      • AlGhorear
        June 21, 2013, 11:59 am

        @seafoid, do you really think the Zionist plan is to stop with that last 22%?

        Taxi has linked a couple of times already to this Israel Shahak article about the Zionists’ expansion plans and she noted how they’re all playing out with the newest war in Syria.

      • seafoid
        June 24, 2013, 3:49 am

        They have been trying to reshape the area for a long time.

        It’s like company management. Can the bots manage Company x better than the locals?

        No. There just aren’t enough Jews to make it work. And they are too squeamish about losing their own soldiers. The bots are great at unleashing the violence but shit at long term planning. They gave up Netzarim. They retreated from Khiam.

  4. Annie Robbins
    June 20, 2013, 3:08 pm

    and let’s not forget what a farce/deadend kerry’s new economic “negotiations” are.

    all i can say for this ‘recent disclosure’ is thank goodness palestinian civil society is already organized behind bds and one state is already being talked about more and more. when you think all the time we’ve spent on pushback against zionists blaming palestinians when it was always clear to anyone with a brain israel was never going to give up one inch of land and was always interested in expanding over all the land. it’s been a sham for decades.

    • Citizen
      June 21, 2013, 2:53 am

      Is there anything more embarrasingly obvious than the conflict between official US policy towards the illegal settlements, and the US de facto policy, heralded every year by our congressional giant carrots to Israel?

      Perhaps, there is. 34 years of draconian economic sanctions on Iran because they are a member of the NNPT, and have a right to nuclear energy, and are continually threatened by the nuclear hegemon in the region, Israel, with its heavy pattern of “preventive war?”

  5. mondonut
    June 20, 2013, 3:21 pm

    It’s why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues to offer his support for a two-state solution–though on terms no Palestinian leader could accept.

    And there’s the rub. Why is it so impossible that the Palestinians rethink what they are willing to accept? What is paramount for the Palestinians, their own state or the dissolution of Israel?

    • Woody Tanaka
      June 20, 2013, 4:49 pm

      “And there’s the rub. Why is it so impossible that the Palestinians rethink what they are willing to accept?”

      ‘nut, you and I will split a swimming pool. 50/50. We’ll agree we will never go in each other’s part of the pool. Okay. My portion goes from the surface halfway down to the bottom. You get from the midway point to the bottom. And remember, you don’t get to ever go in my half.

      Why is it so impossible for you to rethink whether you would be willing to accept that deal??

      • mondonut
        June 20, 2013, 11:09 pm

        Woody Tanaka says: ‘nut, you and I will split a swimming pool. 50/50.
        =======================================
        Not sure what this silly analogy is supposed to mean. Are you saying a Palestinian state cannot survive with the RoR, Jerusalem and an offensive military force?

        If so, none of that is true of course.

      • Cliff
        June 21, 2013, 3:20 am

        Great nut, so let Israel demilitarize, close shop on the LoR and abandon Jerusalem.

      • Shingo
        June 21, 2013, 8:33 am

        Are you saying a Palestinian state cannot survive with the RoR, Jerusalem and an offensive military force?

        Are you saying a Netenyahu said he is prepared to accept a Palestinian state with a defensive military force?

      • Woody Tanaka
        June 21, 2013, 2:22 pm

        “Not sure what this silly analogy is supposed to mean.”

        Of course you’re not.

        “Are you saying a Palestinian state cannot survive with the RoR, Jerusalem and an offensive military force?”

        No, I’m saying that the problem is not the Palestinians acceptance, but the zionists’ position.

    • talknic
      June 20, 2013, 5:41 pm

      @ mondonut “Why is it so impossible that the Palestinians rethink what they are willing to accept?”

      Uh?
      1947 Their country is partitioned without having been consulted.
      1948 The Jewish state is given, completely gratis, over 50% of the territory of ’47 Palestine
      By 1950 the Jewish state illegally acquires another 50% of what had remained
      1967 the Jewish state illegally acquires more non-Israeli territory
      1967 to the present the Jewish state illegally acquires more and more and more and more, in complete defiance of International Law.
      2013 and you want them to compromise even more. You’re hilarious!

      “What is paramount for the Palestinians, their own state or the dissolution of Israel?”

      Uh? 2011 link to haaretz.com and again 2012 link to cfr.org Keep ignoring. Seems there’s never enough ziopoop for some folk to wallow in.

    • Shingo
      June 20, 2013, 6:24 pm

      And there’s the rub. Why is it so impossible that the Palestinians rethink what they are willing to accept?

      It’s impossible, because every time the Palestinians and Israel have agreed to terms, the next Israeli government changes the terms to make them less acceptable. So if the PA were to accept Bibbi’s terms, Bibbi would suddenly decide they were unacceptable to Israel – and so it goes.

      You know this of course, but are to dishobest to admit it.

      • mondonut
        June 20, 2013, 8:06 pm

        Shingo says:It’s impossible, because every time the Palestinians and Israel have agreed to terms, the next Israeli government changes the terms to make them less acceptable.
        ================================================
        Right…

        So the Palestinians are willing to back of their demands for a RoR and eastern Jerusalem – but they fear the Israelis will change their minds. Otherwise they would of course.

      • Shingo
        June 21, 2013, 8:40 am

        So the Palestinians are willing to back of their demands for a RoR and eastern Jerusalem – but they fear the Israelis will change their minds. Otherwise they would of course.

        They already did, as outlined by the Palestine Papers, but as I already pointed out, the Israelis said thanks but no thanks.

        But to give you an idea of what negotiations with Israel look like, let’s take the example of Israel’s approach to “land swaps”.

        The Taba agreement of September 1995 had Israel agreeing to a progressive withdrawal from Areas A, B, and C, with the IDF redeployment out of **all** those areas due by October 1997.

        But in Jan 1997 the settlers made their grab for Hebron, ergo, Israel couldn’t possibly withdraw from Hebron i.e. Rabin reneged on his deal.

        Netanyahu replaced Peres, and at Wye River in Oct 1998 (i.e. a year past the deadline) he insisted that the deal be renegotiated , splitting the second step of the Taba agreement into two phases.

        He then only carried out the first phase, meaning that the second phase of the second step of the three-step Taba agreement wasn’t carried out i.e. Netanyahu reneged not only on Taba but also on the renegotiated deal (Wye River)

        Ehud Barak then replaced Netanyahu, and at Sharm el-Sheikh in 1999 he balked at carrying out phase two of step two. He (and I kid you not) insisted on renegotiating Netanyahu’s re-negotiated deal, leading to a situation where the second phase of the two-phase step-two was split into two, making it a two-step, two-phase, three-step process.

        Barak then carried out Step One of Phase Two of Step Two of the three-step Taba Agreement.

        But he then refused to carry out Step Two i.e. he reneged on the Sharm el-Sheikh renegotiation of the Wye River renegotiation of the deal that had been negotiated at Taba.

        And people wonder why Abbas won’t drop his “preconditions” and simply Go Into The Tent And Negotiate A Deal…..

        The above tells you why i.e. “negotiated a deal” with the Israelis is pointless unless there is some evidence that the Israelis are negotiating in good faith.

        There is zero evidence that Netanyahu will negotiate in good faith, and much evidence that under those circumstances an Israeli PM will simply renege on any such deal.

        So. What. Is. The. Point. Of. Negotiating?

      • Talkback
        June 22, 2013, 5:09 am

        Excellent recapitulation, Shingo.

    • Cliff
      June 20, 2013, 6:26 pm

      mondonut

      if Israel and trolls like you, are so invested in peace then get out of the territories and dismantle the settlements

    • eljay
      June 20, 2013, 7:08 pm

      >> Why is it so impossible that the Palestinians rethink what they are willing to accept?

      Palestinians have a just and moral basis for their claims to a Palestinian state within its / Partition borders and a right of return to Israel for refugees (or the option of payment in lieu).

      Hateful and immoral Zio-supremacists have an unjust, immoral and supremacist basis for wanting the Palestinians to “rethink what they are willing to accept”.

      >> What is paramount for the Palestinians, their own state or the dissolution of Israel?

      A two-state solution does not involve the dissolution of Israel, just an end to supremacist “Jewish State”. And rightly so.

      • mondonut
        June 20, 2013, 10:58 pm

        eljay says: Palestinians have a just and moral basis for their claims to a Palestinian state within its / Partition borders ….
        ===============================================
        The Palestinians are indeed entitled to self determination but there are no “partition borders” that define where that state will exist, hence the need to negotiate.

        And no, a 2ss does not require that Israel make structural changes within – it simply requires that the Palestinian’s primary interest be in establishing their own state.

      • Tzombo
        June 21, 2013, 6:17 am

        And while they negotiate Israel keeps gobbling up more. In fact as the article states that’s the whole point of the ‘peace process’.

      • Shingo
        June 21, 2013, 8:35 am

        The Palestinians are indeed entitled to self determination but there are no “partition borders” that define where that state will exist, hence the need to negotiate.

        There is no need to negotiate. As has been pointed out to you, negotiation is just a fraud to give Israel political cover while it violates international law. What is needed is for Israel to be made to abide by it.

        And no, a 2ss does not require that Israel make structural changes within – it simply requires that the Palestinian’s primary interest be in establishing their own state.

        Which begins with Israel getting the hell out of it.

      • eljay
        June 21, 2013, 9:14 am

        >> The Palestinians are indeed entitled to self determination but there are no “partition borders” that define where that state will exist, hence the need to negotiate.

        What lies outside of Israel’s Partition borders – the borders Israel accepted in 1948 – does not belong to Israel, it belongs to the state of Palestine.

        >> … a 2ss does not require that Israel make structural changes within – it simply requires that the Palestinian’s primary interest be in establishing their own state.

        As much as Zio-supremacists want to believe otherwise, Jewish supremacism is no more just or moral than other forms of supremacism.

        So long as Israel remains an oppressive and supremacist “Jewish State”, non-Jewish citizens of Israel are denied equality in their own country. And that’s not something anyone should find acceptable.

        So, one state or two, Israel must reform into a secular, democratic and egalitarian state of and for all Israelis equally.

        If a 2SS is the reality, I would expect Palestine to be nothing other than a secular, democratic and egalitarian state of and for all its citizens – Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, etc. – equally.

      • mondonut
        June 21, 2013, 10:55 am

        Tzombo says:And while they negotiate Israel keeps gobbling up more. In fact as the article states that’s the whole point of the ‘peace process’.
        ============================================
        Not a fact, an allegation.

      • mondonut
        June 21, 2013, 10:58 am

        Shingo says: As has been pointed out to you, negotiation is just a fraud …
        Which begins with Israel getting the hell out of it.
        ==========================================
        Allegedly a fraud. As has been pointed out to you, if the Palestinians were more interested in their own state rather than Israel, they would have one.

        And as of yet, until a border agreement is finalized there is no Palestinian state to get out of.

      • mondonut
        June 21, 2013, 11:08 am

        eljay says: What lies outside of Israel’s Partition borders – the borders Israel accepted in 1948 – does not belong to Israel, it belongs to the state of Palestine.
        ==========================================
        Since when? And which group of Palestinians are making such a ridiculous claim? The ones in the West Bank want the armistice lines (plus the RoR) and the ones in Gaza want everything.

      • Shingo
        June 22, 2013, 3:24 am

        Allegedly a fraud.

        IS a fraud – gong back to Bibbi’s mentor, Shamir, who said that his goal was to stretch out negotiations long enough until half a million settlers had settled in the West Bank.

        As has been pointed out to you, if the Palestinians were more interested in their own state rather than Israel, they would have one.

        False. A Miko Peled points out, the only reason the Israelis began agreeing to talks in 1993, was because they were confident they had built enough settlements and grabbed enough land to ensure no Palestinian state would ever emerge.

        And as of yet, until a border agreement is finalized there is no Palestinian state to get out of.

        False. See UNSC242. It says Israel is to get out of the territory it grabbed in 1967.

      • Talkback
        June 22, 2013, 5:12 am

        mondonut says: “Since when?”

        Since Israel’s declaration within partition borders.

        “And which group of Palestinians are making such a ridiculous claim? ”

        Actually it is a group of Jews wich make ridiculous claims beyond the 6% land bought until declaration.

      • eljay
        June 22, 2013, 9:20 am

        >> Since when?

        Since Israel agreed to Partition borders in 1948, and since the acquisition of territory by force is illegal.

      • homingpigeon
        June 24, 2013, 3:18 am

        Ooh Shingo Habibi, let me beat the hasbarists to this one – you left yourself wide open to them. Don’t you know that UNSC 242 does not have the word “the” in it thus implying (to them) that they are not required to pull out of all of the territories but just some of them! Yes indeed, they have been known to divert the subject to a discussion of what the presence or absence of “the” means, and people have actually gotten into comparing versions of 242 in the other UN languages, and doing linguistic analyses of this matter. Come on mondonut and team, where are you when you are needed? Tell Shingo that 242 doesn’t require full withdrawal because there is no “the” before “territories.” Or don’t you all go there any more?

      • Citizen
        June 21, 2013, 3:03 am

        Truman deliberately, expressly recognized “the state of Israel,” crossing out the Zionist verbiage, “the Jewish” state. With that edit, he denied Zionism, substituting American values. Or, if you prefer, substituting “Judeo-Christian” values.

        Do our politicians constantly and expressly refer to America’s “Christian and democratic” values? Or do we honor democratic values, with a separation of “church and state.”?

    • Djinn
      June 21, 2013, 1:36 am

      “And there’s the rub. Why is it so impossible that the Palestinians rethink what they are willing to accept? What is paramount for the Palestinians, their own state or the dissolution of Israel?”

      They already have, many times. They are on record as being willing to settle for a mere fraction of the land that was once theirs.

      What is paramount for Israel, peace or stealing the remaining slices of historic Palestine?

  6. just
    June 20, 2013, 3:22 pm

    Well, this has been the plan since the beginning. It’s taken 6 decades plus to get it out in the open, and no amount of backpedaling can undo what’s been said now. They’ve admitted their goal, but of course many indigenous Palestinians have experienced the ethnic cleansing, the brutality, the theft of their land and homes and the killing since the beginning and are more than acutely aware of the diabolical aim of the Zionists. They’ve been denied their freedom and their livelihood. Denied education, health care, water, food, etc. Lots of folks around the world recognize this evil, but the US has remained complicit in all of this– they’ve enabled these criminals and their continued crimes.

    The bell cannot be unrung– too late for the lobby and the bleating and whining of others ‘condemning’ & ‘denying’ these comments.

    ” Look– there’s the truth!” Now what, America? Our best “allies” are liars & thieves of the first order.

    1S1P1V

  7. Sycamores
    June 20, 2013, 3:36 pm

    over the last few weeks Bennet was one only of three who said the 2ss is never going to happen. what about Danny Danon and bibi fiasco with the Polish/israel joint statement. why is this not been plaster all over the media. Obama and Kerry must be aware of this yet not one word of condemnation.

    as Annie said “all the time we’ve spent on pushback against zionists blaming palestinians when it was always clear to anyone with a brain israel was never going to give upone inch of land” at least now we can point at israel (Bennet, Danon and bibi) as the reason why the 2ss failed. Palestinian civil society now has the verbal proof of israel real intentions for all the world to see.

    the real question now is how can this be use in accelerating an one state one vote?

    • Annie Robbins
      June 20, 2013, 5:03 pm

      yeah, that got totally blacked out of US news coverage(as i recall).

      and then there were murmeringd in the press focusing on netanyahu not assigning a new foreign ministry. or something.

      link to haaretz.com

      Netanyahu backtracks on joint statement with Poland on Israeli-Palestinian conflict
      Prime Minister’s Office says low level officials did not inform him of wording on urgency of peace talks, legitimacy of Palestinian state and self-determination.

      After officials of both governments drafted the final version of the joint statement to be issued at the summit’s conclusion, the prime minister distanced himself from it. The Prime Minister’s Office explained that low level staff members of the National Security Council had worked on the statement and had obtained Poland’s agreement without Netanyahu or the council’s director, Yaakov Amidror, ever reading it.

      ……..

      Meretz chairwoman MK Zahava Gal-On said in response that in backtracking on the joint statement, “Netanyahu has shown his true colors. He has been deceiving the public … He has no intention of making peace [with the Palestinians].”

      Diplomatic visits are normally organized through the Foreign Ministry but since its workers are on strike, the Prime Minister’s Office took over logistics and planning.

      The striking workers seized the opportunity to criticize the PMO over “mishaps” during the Poland trip, saying the involvement of “professional diplomats” from the Foreign Ministry would have ensured smooth sailing.

      “I hope the PMO comes to its senses and realizes you cannot conduct foreign relations without the foreign ministry,” Yair Frommer, chairman of the Foreign Ministry workers’ committee, said in a statement.

      link to israelnationalnews.com

      PM to Say ‘Two-State Solution’ is Urgently Needed
      A planned statement refers to an ‘urgent need’ for the ‘two-state solution.’ Netanyahu: I didn’t read it yet.

      In advance of the visit, Israel published a statement which the Israeli delegates are to make following the meeting.

      The statement reads, “There is an urgent need to promote the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The two governments agree on the urgent need to promote the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through direct negotiations, without preconditions.”

      The phrase “without preconditions” could indicate a diplomatic victory for Netanyahu in his efforts to convince Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to drop his pre-negotiation demands. Abbas is insisting that Israel release imprisoned terrorists, allow the PA police to arm itself more heavily, and forbid any and all construction in Israeli communities east of the 1949 armistice line as preconditions for negotiations.

      On Wednesday morning, Galei Tzahal (IDF Radio) asked officials in the Prime Minister’s Office to explain the practical implications of the call to “promote the two-state solution.”

      They were told in response that the Prime Minister could not yet respond because he has not yet reviewed the exact phrasing of the statement. The office of National Security Adviser Maj.-Gen. (res.) Yaakov Amidror reported that Amidror, too, is not yet familiar with the details of the statement, which was written by his staff.

      • Woody Tanaka
        June 20, 2013, 5:09 pm

        Not only did Netanyahoo backtrack on the statement, the statement itself contains the Orwellian horsecrap about not having “preconditions” while the israelis themselves have long put preconditions on negotiating with Paletinians. Indeed, they specifically refuse to even talk to Hamas unless it abides by preconditions.

        I guess it’s a matter of one rule for them, another for the other guy. (i.e., they’re stickin’ hypocrites.)

      • Citizen
        June 21, 2013, 3:12 am

        The Israeli leaders have never retracted their condition that any Palestininian state must be demiliterized. While Israel has the fourth strongest conventional army in the world (or 5th or 6th), guaranteed to be always cutting edge by the sole superpower, plus 3-400 nuclear weapons in stockpile–originally resourced by theft from the USA by Zionists in USA, in defiance of JFK).

      • seafoid
        June 21, 2013, 3:35 pm

        Israel is really badly situated. It is a Western outpost on the edge of Asia with no land border with any ally, and is at least 700 miles from the nearest OECD country.

        It’s fine as long as there is petrol.

        It’s on a coastal plain that is overlooked by the mountains of the West Bank and they decided they wanted the best land so they took it but they would have been better off with the mountains.

        “Trader found the jeweled land
        Was occupied before he came
        By humans of a second look
        Who couldn’t even write their names shame
        Trader said they’re not as good
        As folks who wear velvet robes
        Wrote home again and asked, “Please help
        Their breasts I see; they’re not like me
        Banish them from our prairies and our hillsides
        Clear them from our mountains and our seaside
        I want them off our lakes so please reply
        Signed sincerely.”

      • Blank State
        June 20, 2013, 8:11 pm

        “…yeah, that got totally blacked out of US news coverage(as i recall).”

        ROFLMAO!!!!! You’re really something, Annie.

  8. seafoid
    June 20, 2013, 5:05 pm

    Does this sound familiar?
    link to guardian.co.uk

    “I recently read Joel Joffe’s excellent book The State vs. Nelson Mandela, about the notorious Rivonia trial in South Africa in 1963-64. Joffe describes a world of bigotry, misinformation and deliberate twisting of the legal system in favour of the state against those it considers to be its enemies. In South Africa in the mid-60s terrorism suspects could be held without trial for long periods of time at the whim of the police; conversations between lawyers and their clients were routinely bugged, the information being used to help the prosecution form its case in advance; and religious leaders who dared to raise tricky religious or political topics were chastised by the press.”

  9. gingershot
    June 20, 2013, 5:20 pm

    American Jews are so deeply complicit in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine that the entire community should be shamed – before, during, and after the dismantling of the Apartheid system

    But oh no – they’re going down with the ship, alright

    Let there be NO ONE who says ‘Jews didn’t know’ once this has all been revealed for history. Everyone of them should be forced to face it – and those directly involved wit it within Israel to pay decades of reparations

  10. Blank State
    June 20, 2013, 8:01 pm

    Amazing that these so-called “American Jewish leaders” are so comfortable with being recognized as liars. Bennet also said “build, build, build” when he was delivering his all too rare honest description of Israeli intentions.

    Amazing, isn’t it, when the truth tellers pursuing an agenda expose the liars who are pursuing the same agenda? Its like these so called “leaders” are mumbling…”Shhhh….don’t tell them the truth! They’ll stop giving us money.” Truth be told, the truly despicable ones are these “Jewish Americans” who are selling us down the river. Bennet deserves a mote of respect, at least for his honesty, even if his intentions are worthy of loathing. But both the intentions and the dishonesty of these “American Jewish leaders” deserve only contempt.

    Worse, though, are these non-jewish “leaders”, squatting in DC, who sell us down the river, and advance the great lie about Israel’s intentions, for alms and power. And they are the rule rather than the exception.

    I see where one of the more peacefully co-existent (with their settler neighbors) arab communities has been severely vandalized by Israeli Jewish radicals, right on the heels of Bennet’s words. No suprise there. Bennet’s honesty is awakening the honesty of quite a few of the settlers. They are taking off their masks, and showing us who they REALLY are.

    Israel, unmasked. And, as a result, the unmasking of Washington DC. We’ll still sign the check, and Israel will gladly, (if not gratefully), cash it.

    • Shingo
      June 21, 2013, 1:18 am

      Great post Blank Slate.

      If that’s no bad enough, the Israelis are now asking for next years aid to be paid in advance. Of course, they will not only get it, but the advance will be forgotten and they’ll get the 2014 allowance regardless.

      • Yitzgood
        June 23, 2013, 12:29 am

        OT: Shingo, if you want to continue the exchange we were having in the “Looking for a New Devil” comments thread, suggest a forum for it. It seems that those comments are now closed. Yitz

  11. quirx
    June 20, 2013, 8:06 pm

    In a recent Le Monde Diplomatique article about the new Iranian president vis-à-vis negotiations on Iranian nuclear program, the French indicate that they get it:

    Whether or not this is an accurate depiction of Rouhani, it captures perfectly another item dominating the regional agenda: the Middle East peace process. For Israel and the US, negotiations with the Palestinians have never been about achieving a resolution of the conflict, which can only happen on terms all Israeli governments have rejected. Rather, their primary function has been to reduce international pressure on Israel without it having to make political concessions.

    and

    Israeli governments have consistently embraced negotiations as a relief valve for international pressure to end the occupation, provided that they are not based on international law, reach no decisive conclusion and can be extended unto eternity. As Israeli journalist and former politician Yossi Sarid recalls [link to Ha’aretz), “they used to say about [Prime Minister] Yitzhak Shamir that he conducted peace negotiations with our neighbours as long as they never ended”. “There are no sacred dates”[link to Ha’aretz], insisted former Israeli Prime Minister and architect of the Oslo peace process Yitzhak Rabin. Looking back over twenty years of these negotiations, former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami found himself [link to project-syndicate.org] unable to “escape the conclusion” that “the Israeli-Palestinian peace process has become one of the most spectacular deceptions in modern diplomatic history“. Purportedly aiming to resolve the conflict, its primary function has been to reduce the costs of sustaining it.

    This understanding of the peace process is the only way to make sense of the current situation, in which an Israeli government that explicitly rejects a two-state settlement is pushing for negotiations, against the resistance of a Palestinian leadership that officially accepts it. International opposition to Israeli rejectionism is increasing. Europe grows impatient [link to ynet.com] in the face of protracted diplomatic stagnation: a recent open-letter [link to 972mag.com] signed by 19 former senior European officials stated frankly that the Oslo peace process “has nothing more to offer” and urged a “new approach”, while a non-binding 2012 EU Heads of Missions report went so far as to propose sanctions on Israeli settlements [link to euobserver.com]. Israeli officials have sought to restart direct negotiations, in order to pre-empt the threat of international measures. Thus, in a stormy Knesset debate [link to Ha’aretz.com], Avigdor Lieberman urged opponents of a two-state settlement to support a revived diplomatic process, in the interests of “conflict management”. “If we do not initiate”, he warned, “there will be others who will put plans on the table”.

    USrael is applying a shockingly obvious double standard with respect to pressing political issues that require negotiation. And you can see, it’s not only the French which is good news indeed. Now we just need action.

    Speaking of doubletalk and double standards, here’s a bit about what transpired with Baroness Katherine Ashton’s visit to Netanyahu in Jerusalem [link to jpost.com]. His plan [link to jpost.com] was to express his great displeasure at the intensive focus on Israel and righteous indignation that there are some countries in Europe who are not as enthusiastic as he would like about labeling Hezbollah a terrist organization [sic].

    But great news! “Bulgaria back in line with EU on Hezbollah bomb link – Jerusalem Post” [/sarcasm]

    Wow.
    But I really loved the Baroness’ response to Netanyahu at the end [link to jpost.com]: Ashton’s response to Netanyahu regarding Hezbollah:

    “I hear what you say.”

    Yes, I think that Europe and the EU countries (excluding Czechs) get what is going on.

    • Darcha
      June 21, 2013, 12:18 am

      ‘EU countries (excluding Czechs)’
      Heavy sigh.

      Darcha, Prague

      • quirx
        June 23, 2013, 11:48 am

        Hi Darcha, if I have offended you I apologize- it certainly was not intended in any way!

    • Citizen
      June 21, 2013, 3:20 am

      What’s up with the Czechs? They furnished the original Zionist army with the best USSR weapons too, back in ’47-’49.

      • seafoid
        June 21, 2013, 3:31 pm

        Shoah guilt

    • MRW
      June 21, 2013, 3:59 am

      Good post, quirx. Thanks for the proper linking.

      • quirx
        June 23, 2013, 11:49 am

        It is my pleasure. There are so many inter-linking subjects/aspects and many external references, it is sometimes hard to be concise.

    • Tzombo
      June 21, 2013, 6:22 am

      Exclude the Dutch (at least their gov’t) as well. Foreign minister Timmermans (a member of the technically leftwing but in practice center-right PvdA) has stated he will veto any sanctions on Israel over the settlements.

      • Dutch
        June 21, 2013, 10:24 am

        Exactly. On Tuesday night (after his visit to I/P) Timmermans said he wil support EU-sanctions if Israel starts building in E1. But on Wednesday the reports were altered – ‘Timmermans was misunderstood’, meaning that after returning home the Lobby kicked the living daylights out of him.

        So Darcha, no need to feel lonely ….

      • seafoid
        June 21, 2013, 3:31 pm

        The Dutch Jewish community was more or less wiped out in the Shoah.
        This explains why Germany and the Netherlands are the most vehement EU supporters of Israel, along with the Czechs (who also lost most of their Jews to the Nazis)

  12. ToivoS
    June 20, 2013, 8:51 pm

    Poor Rabbi Jacobs and David Harris. Their view of reality, their delusions obviously, is being seriously challenged. All those years ago they tried to purge Kahane from their Zionist ranks and it turns out he had a clearer notion of reality than they did. To wit, as Kahane once said:

    First let me explain why everybody is mad at me. It’s because I have confronted people with the following contradiction: you can’t have Zionism and democracy at the same time. And for those who criticize me, it’s very difficult to get out of this contradiction. Now let me answer your question. First of all, Western democracy has to be ruled out. For me that’s cut and dried: there’s no question of setting up democracy in Israel, because democracy means equal rights for all, irrespective of racial or religious origins. Therefore democracy and Zionism cannot go together. And Israel’s Declaration of Independence, which proclaimed this state to be a Jewish state, is a totally schizophrenic document. You just can’t, on the one hand, want a Jewish state and at the same time give non-Jews the right to become a majority. When Abba Eban makes beautiful speeches in twelve languages and starts talking about Jewish democracy-what on earth does that mean, Jewish democracy? Let’s get back to your question and let me talk about democracy as far as Jews are concerned. Do I accept democracy for Judaism? My answer is: Judaism does not accept democracy unless it is within a structure that adheres to the law of the Torah. I challenge any rabbi to contradict me on this. My hope as a religious Jew, which is the hope of every sincere and religious Jew, is to have a state governed by the Torah. If one accepts the commandments of the Torah, then democracy is conceivable within the framework of those commandments. Of course, nobody could vote against these commandments. Nobody could question the fact that the government has to abide by the Torah. There is no question of letting people vote for or against the commandments of the Torah. This can’t be decided by a vote. “

  13. Sin Nombre
    June 20, 2013, 8:52 pm

    Alex Kane wrote:

    “the American Jewish establishment keeps clinging to Netanyahu’s current rhetoric about a demilitarized Palestinian state. Without that rhetoric, they’d be left drowning in the reality of the current Israel/Palestine situation: permanent Israeli control over millions of non-Jews. How would they able to sell that?”

    Mr. Kane’s suggestion is wrong here. When The Word comes down—i.e. the official line from the Israeli government—the American Jewish establishment sure as the rising sun will be selling that. Indeed, because the only alternative at that point will be a truly democratic single state with equal rights for all, they will be selling it ferociously, and labeling anyone against it as an eliminationist anti-semite.

    The problem for that American establishment right now is that The Word is still to sell the two-state solution. Why? Because it’s still doing its job of buying time, as is shown by American policy-makers still trumpeting it, even if everyone knows that even they don’t believe it’s viable anymore.

    Or one could put it this way: Can anyone really believe that the American Jewish establishment would break with Israel? Did it break with Israel when it attacked the Liberty? When Bibi refused to grant Obama’s request for even one lousy 30-day cessation of settlement building? When Israel was caught spying on the U.S. with Pollard? Indeed, after first of course making sure that the U.S. was not going to take any serious action as a result of same what did virtually all of the establishment jewish organizations do? (After of course laying low for awhile?) Well of course en masse (but quietly of course) they then even went to bat to get the spy Pollard off the hook *individually* too.

    So, Mr. Kane, or indeed anyone who thinks that our native establishment is gonna break with Israel, gimme an example. Just one. Just one example of *anything* Israel could within reason possibly do (e.g., not “launching nukes against the U.S.) that would —*to anywhere near a clear, certain degree*—occasion the American jewish establishment’s break with it. Just one.

    No, what’s going to happen is that when the last little time-buying utility of professing allegiance to a Two-State solution is absolutely exhausted—which Israel hopes will be just about when it has taken all the land it wants, but in reality when a U.S. President can no longer bring him or herself to say they believe in such a sham anymore—The Word coming from Israel that you will suddenly and *immediately* hear repeated over here too, ad infinitum, is that of *course* everyone recognizes that the Palestinians long ago just dug their own grave and “chose” not to have any state … and that it doesn’t matter anyway because Israel is treating what is left of them fantastically well because of course of all the tikkum olam and milk and honey in their DNA and of course the Palestinians are living better than any other arabs in the world and etc. and so forth so that only anti-semites even pay any attention to the situation anymore, period.

    And you will hear that or whatever close variation of that which is used issued from just about every orifice there is of the American jewish establishment. Not that this means all American jewry, but from their establishment(s) for sure.

    • seafoid
      June 20, 2013, 11:55 pm

      Karma Nabulsi on the Palestine papers

      link to guardian.co.uk

      What I don’t get is how the bots expected this to end.
      Were we all supposed to sit back and applaud their cunning and genius?

    • ToivoS
      June 21, 2013, 2:42 am

      Sin you are wrong here. There are a huge number of American Jews who support Israel that have no idea what their agenda really is. I know from personal interactions with many people who really do believe to this day, that Israel is willing to trade the WB for genuine peace. Even if it should be obvious to any sentient observer that this makes no sense I do believe that rabbi Jacobs believes what he is saying. Perhaps they have been sucked into one big lie but that does not mean they do not remain true believers.

      • Sin Nombre
        June 21, 2013, 7:05 am

        ToivoS wrote:

        “Sin you are wrong here. There are a huge number of American Jews who support Israel that have no idea what their agenda really is….”

        Well of course time will tell, ToivoS, but think it through: Where are they gonna go? What’s gonna be their option?

        And think through the easy path of rationalization that will beckon them:

        When Israel is either done gobbling all the land it wants or the U.S./world says “enough” and means it, Israel is merely gonna draw its border lines around same and tell the world that of course the Palestinians can have what’s left, and if it’s disjointed and infeasible well it’s the Palestinians fault lo these many years but Israel can’t help it anymore and too bad too sad, but it ain’t gonna take in all those outside those borders, period.

        And of *course* Israel can’t take those so excluded into its body politic because otherwise of course Israel wouldn’t be jewish anymore, so while it might not be pretty of course American jews always believed that somehow someway Israel was always just gonna be for the jews. Either because God gave ‘em that land, or because it’s a refuge from Holocausts and repression. Just simply no intellectual room for any bi-nationality there.

        And even if they concede there’s not enough land for a Palestinian state instead of Israel absorbing those Palestinians into their body politic of course the siren song will be that all those Palestinians have the ability to go live in any of the innumerable arab states around, so….

        An easy swallow, ToivoS. Not pretty, but easy.

        You just watch. There can’t be many American jews who don’t at least know of the exclusive death grip that Israel has proclaimed now over Jerusalem, and that hasn’t bothered them, and Jerusalem of course has been at the core of jewish identity for 2000 years now. So what does giving up on Israel mean other than giving up on Jerusalem too?

        That giving up ain’t gonna happen. You can argue that for a long time in jewish history it could have: During the time of its deep religious immersion when it was thought that being dispersed was just something that had to be accepted as God’s puzzling judgment. And even more recently after secularism worked its will to such great effect and it might be said that universalism/socialism sort of became at the center of jewish identity.

        But with the creation of Israel and the destruction of the dream of international socialism … forget it. There’s no place left to go for them but supporting Israel. No meaning to being jewish anymore. Not all that unlike asking them to commit suicide to do otherwise.

        Brutally unfair of course, being put in this position by the likes of Jabotinsky and his progeny, but this isn’t uncommon in history at all and the further history is clear: When put between a rock sharing your blood/culture and a hard place of screwing over someone else, the rock wins. *All* the time.

        You think the great mass of middle-and-upper class German people—the most phlegmatic, educated and cultured in Europe—*liked* Hitler? You think they didn’t see him and his freak-show of a retinue for the thugs they were?

        Of *course* they did. But when put in the position of having nowhere else to go….

        Watch and see, ToivoS, and it might be coming within just a couple of years even given Obama and Biden’s allusions to it already. All it will take is a U.S. President declaring that a 2SS is dead and that will be it. The Israelis will say “no, the Palestinians can have whatever shards we’ve left and if they don’t want same too bad so our jewish state will be the One State solution and everyone everywhere can go pound sand,” and thus the situation is fixed: Either support Israel in doing whatever it will in remaining jewish, no matter how undemocratic, or commit jewish suicide, period.

      • Sibiriak
        June 21, 2013, 10:26 am

        Sin Nombre:

        Israel is merely gonna draw its border lines around same and tell the world that of course the Palestinians can have what’s left, and if it’s disjointed and infeasible well it’s the Palestinians fault

        To me, this is as clear as day. The disjointed remains will be declared the Palestinian “state”, and that will be it.

    • Citizen
      June 21, 2013, 3:32 am

      A good analogy to reality of Israel in US politics is the securities rating agencies. They are paid (very handsomely) by the producers of the securities they rate. Obama “reform” has not changed this at all. The accountants employed by the rating agencies come up with a DDD rating, but the salesmen of those agencies, magically switch that rating to AAA. The accountants have no power. Nothing will change until the investors directly pay the rating agencies.

    • lobewyper
      June 24, 2013, 9:51 pm

      Sin Nombre,

      I think you’re totally on target here with your analysis of the situation–well done!

  14. seafoid
    June 21, 2013, 12:18 am

    link to cosmos.ucc.ie

    “Jews of the Diaspora must ask themselves if they should support a political system they would never have accepted in their own country. How many Jews would accept a ‘Christian-Democratic’ state, in which they would be discriminated against on account of being Jewish? How many Jews would accept a ‘democracy’ in which Jews are not permitted to purchase state land? ”

    link to cosmos.ucc.ie

    “Ha’aretz warned that even if Shamir succeeds in obtaining the loan guarantees he wants without making any change in his policies on the West Bank and Gaza, those who support him should “remember that a Shamir victory means the founding of a bi-national state in place of a Jewish state, Israel.” That is, holding onto the territories means that Israel would have an Arab population of 40 percent, and nearly two million Arabs could not be held in permanent subjection and denied political rights without destroying Israel’s claims to be a democratic state.”
    (Arthur Hertzberg, September 1991)

  15. Shingo
    June 21, 2013, 1:15 am

    It’s no surprise they as MJ Rosenberg points out, the only thing Netenyahu is prepared to agree to over talks is the Palestinians recognizing Israel as a Jewish State. The dispute about territory doesn’t matter.

  16. MRW
    June 21, 2013, 2:51 am

    Alex, can you get this cross-posted at Open Zion, or rewrite it for them?

  17. Citizen
    June 21, 2013, 3:38 am

    When will poor Dick and Jane tire of buying swampland in Israel?

Leave a Reply