The uproar over Netanyahu’s scheduled speech to the Congress in March has landed on the front page of the Times today. The thrust of the article headlined “A Strained Alliance…” by Peter Baker and Jodi Rudoren is that things are very bad in the view of many Israel-watchers, but the two countries had better get over the problem soon. A friend says it is “conservative.” To me it reads like a dispatch from the Israel lobby.
The last paragraph is handed over to Josh Block, a right wing Israel supporter, who tells the countries’ leaders to grow up.
“It would be nice if a level of maturity kicked in and we did not allow the personality-driven issues and political issues to overwhelm what are incredibly important common global issues,” said Josh Block, president of the Israel Project, a pro-Israeli education group in Washington. “It’s important we focus on what really matters.”
The article quotes no Palestinians. None. Maybe they think this rift is a good thing? Maybe John Mearsheimer thinks it’s a good thing? Yousef Munayyer? Munayyer says on twitter today:
Imagine a pre-1994 MSM discourse on US-South Africa that entirely excluded black south africans
It quotes a number of Israel supporters and Israelis, from Block to Martin Indyk to Efraim Halevy to Eytan Gilboa (“Of course this is a crisis”) to Richard Haass.
It makes scant reference to all the substantive causes of a fallout between the countries, for instance the latest announcement of Israeli colonies in the occupied West Bank.
It is worried about what John Kerry might do because of the crisis:
[H]e may be emboldened to pursue an Israeli-Palestinian peace plan through the United Nations or outside powers without waiting for Mr. Netanyahu’s assent.
I guess you could argue that it is about the US-Israeli relationship and so Palestinian comment is unnecessary, but I don’t buy it, especially when people are quoted as saying how the two countries share common values and so the relationship shouldn’t be turned into one between two political parties.I don’t think Ta-Nehisi Coates knows enough about the I/P conflict to comment, but if he ever immerses himself in the subject I suspect he might say that we do share common values, but not in a nice way. We share a common interest in self-mythologizing and whitewashing our crimes. The spiel about common values reminds me of the long period from the late 1870s until the 1960’s when whites in both the North and South agreed that the Civil War was a war of brother against brother, good intentions on both sides, tragic, and wasn’t it great that we were reunited and one big happy family, while Jim Crow in the south and sundown towns in the North were a constant reminder of who wasn’t part of the big happy family.
There is also not the slightest clue in this piece that Obama’s disdain for Israel may reflect real currents in US public opinion reflective of Israeli policy, for instance the slaughter of 500 children in Gaza last summer. The Times of Israel reports today: “Britons Loathe Israel More than Iran.” It shows that there has been a massive shift in attitudes in the last two years:
Britons feel more “unfavorable” to Israel than any other country worldwide except North Korea, a survey found.
The survey — taken in August and published Thursday by Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs — showed a massive surge in negative attitudes toward Israel since the previous such study, two years earlier. Thirty-five percent of Britons said they “feel especially unfavorable towards” Israel in the 2014 survey, compared to 17% in 2012.
Many Americans are also feeling this way. The core constituents of the Democratic Party are increasingly alienated by U.S. policy on Israel (Shibley Telhami reports): Hispanics, blacks, the young, and women.
In other words, Obama and other Democrats may feel that it is not just important but politically feasible to thumb their noses at a warmongering foreign leader. But you’d never know it from the Times.
For decades Israel has worked to make this a religious conflict instead of a political one. The real story is that the feelings are anti-israel and no matter how hard they try to spin it not anti Jewish. Frankly when it comes to religion most western people don’t care. Israel know too much about the US for the U.S. to have a clean break. Witness today’s leak to the Washington Post that the Assasination of Imad Muginayeh was a joint CIA Mossad effort. I’m sure there is lots of blackmail going on. Imagine how much intelligence they get from all the trap doors in the security software they sold us. We all know how dirty politicians are. No this is much ado about nothing. Netanyahu knows full well there is no penalty to be paid for disrespecting not just the President but all Americans. But the penalty for the U.S. is huge loss of prestige and influence all over the world
Minor correction, in case someone didn’t know what they were and wanted to google the term–I meant “sundown towns”, but typed “sunset towns” by mistake.
Sundown towns
my instinct is that netanyahu is gambling the “friction” boosts his chances of holding onto power. so everything happening right now is aimed at enhancing his attractiveness as a candidate, his image as someone tough who can stand up to the WH and compete on an equal footing, also proving his bonafides with congress. what looks like a clusterf’ck from here may look like schadenfreude to the settler types.
of course, i could be wrong. but if he’s about to lose an election he probably doesn’t care about the overall US/IS relationship right now. he’s looking at where he can pick up votes. it’s not from the left or the ‘moderates’ (by israeli standards). there are a bunch of israelis who want to be tough..never apologize (sound familiar) https://mondoweiss.mystagingwebsite.com/2015/01/apologies-declares-controversy . there’s his competition. the worse the relationship looks between now and the election, the better are his chances of capturing the votes.
just a hunch. and what BS of josh block to say It would be nice if a level of maturity kicked in and we did not allow the personality-driven issues and political issues to overwhelm…
he’s all about personality-driven issues when it comes to taking down his opponents. this is nothing but a rah rah holding the troops together (US israel supporters)thru the rough storm. that’s why they didn’t interview any palestinians, it has nothing to do with palestinians (from their perspective) because it was written for israel’s supporters who are fretting and rubbing their hands together. it’s a lobby driven piece and that’s why it doesn’t mention the most likely scenario, that this is all about enhancing netanyahu’s image at home where insulting the US president looks good where it matters>the israeli electorate.
“that this is all about enhancing netanyahu’s image at home where insulting the US president looks good where it matters>the israeli electorate.” Annie.
Translated means that if Nietanyahu is elected , then the majority of Jewish Israelis agree with his view that Americans are dumb s—s and are there to serve Israel,s needs at the expense of their own.Sure , Dick and Jane , keep sending Yossi and Jodi your hard earned dollars and keep up the diplomatic cover at the UN while our beloved Bibi insults your leader and gives him a swift kick in his family Jewels when he gets out of line.
Pathetic behaviour by the most powerful nation on this planet.
As Annie points out, part of Netanyahu’s motivation is to improve his electoral prospects — an angle that was also completely left out of the Times’s “analysis.”