Israel does not stand alone

[shira]

The claim of Israel’s isolation, echoed by Democratic and Republican leaders alike, is gaining status as fact. “Israel finds itself increasingly isolated, beleaguered, and besieged,” John Heilemann wrote recently in New York magazine. The Economist reported that “Israel’s isolation has . . . been underlined by the deterioration of its relations with Turkey and Egypt.” New York Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristof accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “isolating his country,” while Thomas Friedman described Israel as “adrift at sea alone.”

But is Israel really more isolated now than in the past?

Isolation, of course, is not automatically symptomatic of bad policies. Britain was isolated fighting the Nazis at the start of World War II. Union forces were isolated early in the Civil War, as was the Continental Army at Valley Forge. “It is better to be alone than in bad company,” wrote the young George Washington. That maxim is especially apt for the Middle East today, where one of the least-isolated states, backed by both Iran and Iraq and effectively immune to United Nations sanctions, is Syria.

Israel, in fact, is significantly less isolated than at many times in its history. Before the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel faced a belligerent Egypt and Jordan and a hostile Soviet bloc, Greece, India and China — all without strategic ties with the United States. Today, Israel has peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan; excellent relations with the nations of Eastern Europe as well as Greece, India and China; and an unbreakable alliance with America. Many democracies, including Canada, Italy and the Czech Republic, stand staunchly with us. Israel has more legations abroad than ever before and recently joined the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which comprises the most globally integrated countries. Indeed, Egypt and Germany mediated the upcoming release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who had been held hostage by Hamas for five years.

more...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/israel-does-not-stand-alone/2011/10/12/gIQAbXqyhL_story.html

[Tesha]

1. No, we're always standing right next to them, casting the only opposing vote...

...at the UN Security Council, selling them weapons, and
so on.

As long as American politicians are scared of pro-Israel
lobbyists, Israel will never walk alone.

Tesha

[shira]

2. Maybe the USA stands next to Israel against the hatred and bigotry of other nations. n/t

[Tesha]

3. Other nations seem to have a more-balanced perspective on the relative...

...rights of the Zionist immigrants versus (all) of
the original residents of the various areas?

Or maybe we *ARE* the only ones in the world who
have it right, huh?

Tesha

[shira]

4. It's not about human rights. The conflict is existential and always has been.

Those for Israel's right to continue on as a Jewish state "have it right".

All the rest are on the wrong side of history.

[Tesha]

5. Curiously enough, most seem to accept Israel's righ to exist, at least within...

...its 1949 borders.

It's Israel's recent expansionism and the efforts
of "the settlers" to displace the long-term residents
of the areas outside those borders that seem to provoke
the dissension.

Tesha

[shira]

7. Nations don't accept Israel as a Jewish state. Not without some mythical right of return.

The same was true before 1967, before any settlers or occupation.

[Shaktimaan]

21. well, it's fair of them to dissent...

but cramming israel into those borders permanently was never thought to be a reasonable or probable long term solution.
the question at hand is not "should those borders be permament? but how MUCH should we change them?

Now the war was a long long time ago. For the most part, no one is getting displaced today, except some bedouins, which is a different story altogether. Most of the arabs in the west bank are settlers there themselves. They were displaced during the nakba when they left Israel. They were displaced when Jordan evicted them. There is no difference between them and the jewish refugees who were thrown out of palestine and the arab world at large, before getting absorbed by Israel.

The bigger issue IMO is that a great deal of Palestinians do NOT accept Israel's right to exist at all. And most of the rest reject its right to exist as a Jewish state. Sadly, hamas has ALWAYS said that they support the total annihalation of Jews in Palestine. So... how can you make peace?

[Jefferson23]

6. The last line should have been the first line in the opening, would save readers from wasting

their time.


Michael Oren, The writer is Israel’s ambassador to the United States.

[shira]

8. Of course. It must all be a lie. Your sources like Norm Finkelstein are far more credible.

:eyes:

[Jefferson23]

9. Can't stay on topic for long, can you? lol.

Finkelstein is now the focus for you, ok:

snip* Now when he talks about the Arabs, some Jews feel that he is also anti-Zionist, that he is anti-Israel; that he seems to always emphasize the suffering of the Arabs. I do not join him in this particular venture because I have my own view, but you cannot say he is altogether wrong either. Would you like to be an Arab citizen in Israel? Think of the doors that are closed. You may eat better and have a better income than if you lived in a slum in Cairo. The great irony is that the economic condition of Israeli Arabs is considerably better than the proletariat in some other Arab countries, but a person needs something more. A person needs a feeling of dignity. Think of the security check points. It is a life that certainly something ought to be done about it in one way or another. This particular battle cannot be fought forever. It cannot be. The Israelis will tire of it. The Israelis will simply tire of mistrusting people. It is not possible to go on this way forever.

Finkelstein has the corner on the germ of correct vision in these matters because he is pretty sharp. More often than not, especially with regard to these other matters like Goldhagen and the Swiss banks he has been right.



http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_6.1-2/hilberg.htm

[shira]

10. Hilberg's endorsement hardly establishes Finkelstein as a credible source. Many scholars...

...say he's nothing more than a hate-filled crank. Would you like a list of real scholars who think the buffoonery he writes about Israel is nothing but shit?

I don't think you know what a credible, reliable source is.

If something doesn't conform to your extremely skewed political POV, it's not credible to you.

[Jefferson23]

13. Hardly? His words are there, people can decide for themselves.

I know so far among other statements you have made, there does not exist any human rights group, not the
UN body, nor the ICJ that you find credible regarding the Israeli government's action toward the Palestinians. That is all I need to know,
for now.

[shira]

14. And 10x more scholars reject Finkelstein, so?

Let's compare the number of human rights groups I find acceptable to the number of organizations dedicated to fighting antisemitism you find credible.

Okay?

I suspect you don't find any credible.

"That's all I need to know".

:)

[Jefferson23]

15. Look, you believe a scholar with Hillberg's standing trumps him, be my guest.

I already pointed out from your list of "human rights groups", that they are no such thing. They do
not follow any process, they bare no resemblance to B'Tselem, AI etc.

I left the link of the Hillberg interview for anyone who is interested, not to convince you.

You have made yourself clear, several times now, in more than one thread. You reject all of them, the UN body
and the ICJ too. They are incapable of impartiality, according to you..even Hillberg's words for Finkelstein
you also deny the understanding.

I have learned quite a bit about your positions, thanks.

[shira]

20. I'm still waiting for u to provide 1 credible jewish org. dedicated to fighting antisemitism.

It's okay, I already know you can't do it.

None are credible, right? They're Jewish ploys to cover for Israel.

:eyes:

Just say so.

==========================================

And FWIW, the 3 organizations I provided for you are credible human rights groups. Tell you what, why don't you email them and tell them YOU don't think they're credible human rights groups. Tell me what they say in response.

[Jefferson23]

23. I have no reason to email any of them, you ask the most bizarre questions.

There is a process human rights groups follow, this was already posted for you..the ones you
listed do not follow any such protocol. Also, previously posted for you, not with one word has
UN Watch ever taken Israel's government to task for their actions toward the Palestinians.

The group with Bernstein specifically does not consider democracies, AT ALL..how convenient, that
leaves out examining, Israeli policy.

The respected human rights groups like AI have condemn many countries, not only Israel.

[shira]

25. You believe some HR groups are credible WRT Israel despite their performance at the NGO conference

...at Durban 2001.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=368563&mesg_id=368650

Those links from the NYT, SALON, and ADL show how they actively participated in and promoted vicious antisemitism 10 years ago.

Why should anyone in their right mind believe HR groups like Amnesty and HRW have since then been credible WRT Israel?

:shrug:

You'd have to be willfully blind to believe they're fair with Israel.

Imagine Pam Gellar and the gang at JihadWatch forming their own HR group with standards just as high as HRW and Amnesty, but focusing primarily on Arab and Muslim states. You wouldn't find their propaganda to be credible or reliable, so why trust HRW and Amnesty WRT Israel after their Durban performance?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

11. Which is why campaigns are needed to change this.

I *don't* believe that the status quo is naturally unsustainable; I think that the most likely future for the ME is that the occupation will continue to expand, with the tacit support of the rest of the world. If we're ever to see Palestinian statehood, we have to *make* the status quo unsustainable for Israel. BDS and campaigns to isolate and weaken Israel are the only hope for peace.

[shira]

12. The occupation will expand? Since 1967, it's narrowed. Sinai and Gaza are unoccupied.

South Lebanon was occupied, but later given back.

Israel has since 2000 offered twice to end the occupation and settlements in the West Bank. Netanyahu has offered to turn over 60% of the West Bank.

If you're truly against the occupation, you'd have favored each of these offers. The occupation would be history by now.

Of course, ending the occupation isn't the real goal, is it? Your team needs the occupation to continue in order to carry on with your delegitimization efforts.

[Tesha]

18. Ahh, Gaza. Unoccupied, but blockaded. How's that working out? (NT)

[pelsar]

19. actually pretty good....

the rockets have stopped....no longer are the citizens of israel subjected to daily attacks. They've stopped attacking israeli import stations, that brought in food and supplies, Egypt has its own border with gaza giving the gazans an alternative route to import food, medicine, hospitals visits etc.

Plus, this is a chance to see what the Palestinians of gaza can actually do with self rule....do they make a democracy, install human rights? protect gay rights? or do we see the creation of yet another theocratic dictatorship through new laws, institutions, and govt decree?....this is a chance for them to take advantage of a limited environment with several options.

[Shaktimaan]

22. just so we're clear...

Israel HAS been significantly disengaging from occupied areas, slowly, as per their agreement. So the occupation is shrinking, not growing.
In some areas, like gaza, widespread violence broke out, culminating in non-stop rocket attacks on israel. Which then caused a blockade. And a war. And now a standstill.

So israel has been doing exactly what everyone suggested for years. Things have gotten significantly worse for everyone. And it is still Israel's fault.

[azurnoir]

24. umhmm in the real world:Netanyahu seeks to legalize outposts built on private Palestinian land

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has instructed Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman to set up a task force to explore ways to legalize houses in the settlements that were built on private Palestinian land.

The instruction was issued under heavy pressure from settlers and others on the right in response to the state's decision to demolish several outposts built on private Palestinian land over the next half year.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/netanyahu-seeks-to-legalize-outposts-built-on-private-palestinian-land-1.389233

[azurnoir]

16. well Israel does not stand 'alone' but only one nation gives Israel carte blanche

and that is the US, when it comes to support of Israel exactly what does that mean? Does it mean voting against Palestinian statehood at the UNGA?

[vminfla]

17. Great article

the myth that Israel is isolated because of a couple of reactionary leftists is pervasive. Yet, it is quickly dashed when butressed with action from powerful allies such as Canada, Italy, and Eastern Euroean Nations. I recall a few years back the perenniel "Boycott Israel" groups coming to a Caterpillar board meeting asking for Caterpillar to no longer do business with Israel on "Humanitarian Grounds". The board trouncely rejected the proposal, citing the proposal was preposterous and the silly group was dismissed. The positive response by the stockholder community and the summary rejection of the anti-Israeli boycott group was overwhelming.