The United Nations would want us to believe it is an assembly of 193 independent nations - coming together to deal with the world's most entrenched problems.
As this latest UNSC fiasco so clearly illustrates, the UN is a place where back-room deals, bloc voting, arm-twisting, and blackmail are accepted business processes. The adventures of Netanyahu, Trump, Obama, al Sisi, the New Zealanders, Venezuela, and others show us how the game is really played.
The voting process that takes place in front of the cameras is cosmetic theater. The significant deals that actually delivered the votes are hidden from view.
Irrespective of one's position on the policy statements of Donald Trump, or the views held by David Friedman, I think there is a broad mis-fire in Mr. Brownfeld's argument.
The selection of US diplomats to foreign posts belongs to the President and the Secretary of State. It is subject to review by Congress. By convention, and out of respect, the government receiving the ambassador, (in this case, Israel), is typically consulted prior to to the selection and vetting process.
The notion that a US Ambassador to Israel must also be approved by the Palestine Authority or Jordan is strange. And the thought that the selection of Mr. Friedman somehow fuels Da'esh is over-the-top.
Is Mr. Brownfeld suggesting that Mr. Trump place a phone call to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to negotiate a list of agreeable US Ambassadors to Israel? Even if the Trump team had renewed Daniel Shapiro's contract, how would that have reduced ISIS / Daesh animosity against Israel, Jordan, or the Palestinian leadership?