Israel: Adrift at Sea Alone

[bemildred]

Breaking my self-imposed taboo on posting Friedman.
:spank::spank:

I’VE never been more worried about Israel’s future. The crumbling of key pillars of Israel’s security — the peace with Egypt, the stability of Syria and the friendship of Turkey and Jordan — coupled with the most diplomatically inept and strategically incompetent government in Israel’s history have put Israel in a very dangerous situation.

This has also left the U.S. government fed up with Israel’s leadership but a hostage to its ineptitude, because the powerful pro-Israel lobby in an election season can force the administration to defend Israel at the U.N., even when it knows Israel is pursuing policies not in its own interest or America’s.

Israel is not responsible for the toppling of President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt or for the uprising in Syria or for Turkey’s decision to seek regional leadership by cynically trashing Israel or for the fracturing of the Palestinian national movement between the West Bank and Gaza. What Israel’s prime minister, Bibi Netanyahu, is responsible for is failing to put forth a strategy to respond to all of these in a way that protects Israel’s long-term interests.

O.K., Mr. Netanyahu has a strategy: Do nothing vis-à-vis the Palestinians or Turkey that will require him to go against his base, compromise his ideology or antagonize his key coalition partner, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, an extreme right-winger. Then, call on the U.S. to stop Iran’s nuclear program and help Israel out of every pickle, but make sure that President Obama can’t ask for anything in return — like halting Israeli settlements — by mobilizing Republicans in Congress to box in Obama and by encouraging Jewish leaders to suggest that Obama is hostile to Israel and is losing the Jewish vote. And meanwhile, get the Israel lobby to hammer anyone in the administration or Congress who says aloud that maybe Bibi has made some mistakes, not just Barack. There, who says Mr. Netanyahu doesn’t have a strategy?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/opinion/sunday/friedman-israel-adrift-at-sea-alone.html

[oberliner]

1. In posting this are you expressing agreement with Tom Friedman?

Or are you posting it to show how wrong he is?

For instance, do you agree with his comments that you bolded?

[bemildred]

3. Generally, I am in agreement.

There are some things I would quibble with, if in a quibbling mood.

What I find interesting in it is that I consider him somewhat a spokesperson for US establishment views, so it offers the hope of some insight into their thinking.

[Dover]

2. I think many Israelis cultivate a culture that see's itself standing alone against the world.

It's an ingrained victim mentality and as it is for all of us, our reality is constructed in large part by our own internally generated reality. In fact those 'isolationist' tendencies have much in common with America's own
suspicions and fears about the world at large. An unhealthy and co-dependent relationship.

Other countries have their own self-imposed 'issues' and fear-based cultural and emotional baggage. I simply wonder how Israel might have shifted their 'reality' by cultivating another outlook.

[Jefferson23]

4. For this guy, this is pretty good, lol. The powerful pro-Israel lobby? oh my oh my, such talk!

[oberliner]

16. You agree with Friedman's editorial here?

Or are you making a joke?

[bemildred]

17. Both. He agrees, and he thinks it is funny that Friedman is saying it,

where as non-Friedmans could be savaged for being antisemites if they mentioned the same obvious political influence, which IS certainly an important fact in US politics. It is "tainted" so we can't talk about it, but Friedman can, and in other contexts that same influence is a source of pride. So there is irony. I know I studiously avoid bringing that subject up, despite its relevance, because I know I will be called names, and for the most part I am OK with that, because I know why it's that way.

[Jefferson23]

19. Bemildred's response to you re: mine is exactly right. n/t

[bemildred]

20. My pleasure, I did not want to interfere, but it seemed so obvious. nt

[Jefferson23]

21. I appreciate it Bemildred, thanks. n/t

[oberliner]

24. No need to be snippy

It wasn't obvious to me. I find it quite startling actually to see so much agreement with someone that I thought was so poorly regarded.

[bemildred]

27. Everybody gets a bit snippy now and then down here.

I thought your question was reasonable, for the reasons you state, which is why I took the trouble to provide an answer; however it is also quite true that his meaning was obvious to me, and seemed not that hard to figure out.

I could now go off on a long discourse about how my affections are independent of my agreements and judgements blah blah blah, ...,but I'm going to skip it.
:hi:

[shira]

5. Doesn't matter what Israel does...

Israel could ask at the UN why the PA refused to negotiate for almost the entire 10 months of an unprecedented settlement freeze 2 years ago.

Israel could ask why the PA rejected both the 2001 and 2008 peace offers.

It wouldn't matter.

To idiots like Friedman, the Palestinians aren't responsible for anything. It's all Israel's fault and Israel is expected to make more tough decisions, as though they've offered and conceded nothing over the last 20 years while thousands of Israeli civilians have been killed or targeted with rockets.

Moron.

[Jefferson23]

6. Consider if you would, e-mailing him your thoughts. Perhaps he'll respond

and you could post it here.

[shira]

7. If I thought it'd make a difference, maybe. But you can't get through to the 'religious'.

Friedman thinks Abbas and the PA must be tested yet again with another offer they'll refuse.

THIS time the whole world would know if the Palestinians are serious about peace - if only Israel makes a credible offer.

This time. As if there were no other times.

Right.

Definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over...

[Jefferson23]

8. Friedman thinks they must be tested yet again..where did you get that from?

[shira]

9. Last year...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/opinion/20friedman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Second, I have no idea whether the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, has the will and the guts to make peace with Israel. In fact, when you go back and look at what Ehud Olmert, Netanyahu’s predecessor, offered Abbas — a real two-state compromise, including a deal on Jerusalem — and you think that Abbas spurned that offer, and you think that Netanyahu already gave Abbas a 10-month settlement freeze and Abbas only entered serious talks in the ninth month, you have to wonder how committed he is.

But the fact is that the team of Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad have built a government that is the best the Palestinians have ever had, and, more importantly, a Palestinian security apparatus that the Israeli military respects and is acting as a real partner. Given this, Israel has an overwhelming interest to really test — that is all we can ask — whether this Palestinian leadership is ready for a fair and mutually secure two-state solution.

That test is something the U.S. should not have to beg or bribe Israel to generate. This moment is not about Obama. He’s doing his job. It is about whether the Israeli and Palestinian leaders are up to theirs. Abbas is weak and acts weaker. Netanyahu is strong and acts weak. It is time for both to step it up. And it is time for all the outsiders who spoil them to find another hobby.

[Jefferson23]

10. I had a feeling I would regret asking you a question earlier. You read

this OP and think the basis of it, and this is Friedman now, a gentleman I have no use for btw, is primarily about testing the Palestinians
is odd.

** Given what Obama has done, and is trying to do, it is hardly an act of hostility for him to ask Israel to continue its now-expired 10-month partial moratorium on settlement-building in the West Bank in order to take away any excuse from the Palestinians to avoid peace talks. Israel’s prime minister, Bibi Netanyahu, has been either resisting this request or demanding a payoff from the U.S. for a brief continuation of the freeze. He is wrong on two counts.

*** But the fact is that the team of Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad have built a government that is the best the Palestinians have ever had, and, more importantly, a Palestinian security apparatus that the Israeli military respects and is acting as a real partner. Given this, Israel has an overwhelming interest to really test — that is all we can ask — whether this Palestinian leadership is ready for a fair and mutually secure two-state solution.

**** That test is something the U.S. should not have to beg or bribe Israel to generate. This moment is not about Obama. He’s doing his job. It is about whether the Israeli and Palestinian leaders are up to theirs. Abbas is weak and acts weaker. Netanyahu is strong and acts weak. It is time for both to step it up. And it is time for all the outsiders who spoil them to find another hobby.(end)

He is clear, Bibi has NO excuses left..he needed to agree to Obama's request from last year's OP. Friedman acknowledges that Abbas and Fayyad have done well. " Palestinian security apparatus that the Israeli military respects and is acting as a real partner." He does speak to his
lack of faith of Abbas etc but I don't see that as prevalent over his concerns about Netanyahu.

His current OP leaves out those concerns..funny how people change.

[shira]

14. Here's Abbas just days ago, as intransigent as ever...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdqoMKZaTxU&feature=player_embedded

How can Israel be expected to negotiate with that? Those are US positions, as well as EU that are taken for granted as conditions the PA will have to accept in any genuine 2 state deal.

Abbas has repeated the same shit for years.

Do you think a Meretz/Labour proposal for peace would move Abbas/Fayyad one bit? Seriously now...

[Jefferson23]

18. IslamAgainstTheWorld shira?? This is what you refer to when arguing

against what Friedman said..ok. This is ridiculous, I suggest you send Friedman an e-mail with this clip too.

Who knows, maybe you'll receive a response. Your twist on reality may amuse even Friedman.

[Violet_Crumble]

25. I'm glad I'm not the only one who found that channel she posted questionable...

Here's the response in another thread where I pointed it out

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=364276&mesg_id=364518

[Jefferson23]

28. There exists no support for her claims regardless. The name of

the channel and their content, what can I say...this is a moderated forum and I'll leave it at that.

[shira]

29. So you don't believe Abbas said all that in the video?

You think that based on the source, the video is questionable?

I'm trying to figure out how this works for you guys. If the source is sketchy, it doesn't matter whether video evidence is brought forth. If the source is okay, you default into mistranslation/misinterpretation mode. Deny, deny....?

Just wondering.

[Crunchy Frog]

11. So Friedman believes in a powerful Israel lobby that heavily influences American policy?

Does that make him an anti-semite and an accolyte of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

[King_David]

12. Only if you think that it is sinister nt

[azurnoir]

13. Luuuv your choice of words here "sinister" conjurers up all kinds of things

is dis approving of a lobby having a great amount of influence of certain policy or believing that the policy that lobby promotes might not be in America;s best interests the same as believing that the lobby is "sinister" in your book?

eta clarity

[Violet_Crumble]

15. So if Crunchy thinks it's sinister, that makes Friedman an antisemite?

Oh-kay....

[King_David]

22. Is that true? nt

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Is what true? n/t

[pelsar]

23. i'm sorry i actually had to laugh at this...

i can't figure out how to define it....its like the opposite of anti semitism, believing that the israeli jew is all powerful, can read the future and can influence events thousands of km away even while they are happening......

one example: about the arab spring (syria, egypt, pa/hamas)
Bibi Netanyahu, is responsible for is failing to put forth a strategy to respond to all of these in a way that protects Israel’s long-term interests

the 'arab spring" is still in the middle of power struggles with nobody knowing who is going to be on top....and somehow Netanyahu is guilty of not knowing how to respond? and to whom should he be respond to exactly?

sorry friedman, while i appreciate the compliment that we are all that powerful and its just that netanyhu doesn't know how to wield our new powers.......we really can't read the future, nor can we interfere realistically in internal arab politics (tried that, the consequences don't really pan out as planned), but thanks anyway....

and just for the record..israels isolation was far worse after the 6 day war.....with the eastern block having severed relations, russia rearming the arabs with even more modern weapons, a france embargo...wrong here too friedman

[Jefferson23]

30. If Tom Friedman can say it, you can too

Even Israel's most ardent supporters now say its lobby skews the political landscape and damages both the US and Israel.

MJ Rosenberg Last Modified: 24 Sep 2011 09:58

The most appalling aspect of the Obama administration's inept handling of the upcoming UN vote on Palestinian statehood is the reason for the administration's bumbling. Its moves are dictated by fear of offending Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, his lobby and, especially, the campaign donors who take direction from that lobby.

One can respond: So what else is new? But that is only if you get your information from some place other than the electronic or print mainstream media. There, due to a decades-long campaign of intimidation, the lobby's actions are rarely reported.

That is because the organisations that compose the lobby - including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League - have demonstrated that even mentioning the lobby's excessive power will lead to being smeared with the label of "anti-Israel" or "anti-Semitic".

No matter that the lobby's most powerful component, AIPAC, brags about its power over Washington policymakers in speeches, literature and at its annual conclave, which is attended by most of Congress and often the president and the secretary of state. No matter that AIPAC's eight-story headquarters overlooking the Capitol testifies to its wealth. No matter that members of Congress themselves - occasionally publicly and often privately - discuss the bluntness of AIPAC's threats.

in full: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/2011921103657427605.html

[bemildred]

31. Regarding "bumbling".

I am always reluctant to think of Obama as "bumbling". Sometimes when dealing with fools the only thing to do is get out of the way, and doing nothing while looking energetic is one thing US politicians do really well.

[Jefferson23]

32. Yea, I see your point and quite frankly his use of the word to describe

Obama's handling is somewhat contradictory of what he so often and correctly points out. The perpetual undue influence in
US politics. Obama has choices, no doubt about that imo, but from a politician's pov, they are quite narrow in scope..to say the least.

on edit for clarity.

[bemildred]

33. Yes, not having any better options can look like "bumbling" too. nt