Monday, March 15, 2010
Taking us for granted
It is shocking to me to read about the reaction in Congress to the latest kerfluffle with Israel. To review the sequence of events, I recall the following:
- Vice-President Joe Biden, on a visit to Israel, stated that there is no difference between the US and Israel regarding policy. Israel is our ally and we will defend its right to exist, etc., etc., etc. Or something to that effect.
- Israel then announced that it was proceeding with the construction of several hundred housing units for Jews in East Jerusalem. East Jerusalem is the Arab quarter of Jerusalem and the Israeli government had previously agreed not to start any new settlements in the imediate future. The US has stated repeatedly that the continuing settlement activity, the continual taking of land from the Palestinians for Jewish settlements are an obstacle to peace. Presidents Bush and Obama are in complete agreement on that.
- Mr. Biden, who was then scheduled to visit the Palestinian Authority, was caught off guard by the announcement. It was an embarassment to him and to the United States. Our ally Israel was showing the world that it had the United States in its pocket and it could do anything it wanted. Mr. Obama chastized Mr. Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, for making such an announcement at a time that it showed contempt for the United States and its effort to get the peace process moving.
- Here's the real shocking part: members of Congress criticized President Obama and Vice President Biden for objecting to the Israeli announcement and for chastizing the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The criticism of Obama was not partisan. Rather it came from unapologetic supporters of Israel in the federal congress.
So, Israel can thumb its nose at us and we should eat the humiliation?
Labels: Biden, Israeli settlements, Netanyahu, Obama
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Rift between U.S. and Israel
According to a newsletter that arrives by e-mail every day, Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel stated that there is a disagreement between Israel and the United States about how to restart the peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. The Obama Administration wants Israel to stop all activity related to building settlements in "Palestinian" land. Many other countries agree with this American position. New settlements are very important to Netanyahu and he refuses to stop settlement construction without very important concessions from the surrounding Arab governments.
In my humble opinion, Netanyahu and his supporters have no interest whatever in freezing the building of new settlements. His position is that there should not be a Palestinian state and that Jews from any part of the world have a God-given right to live anywhere they choose in Biblical Israel. His policy and that of the Likud Party is to continue construction of new settlements and the acquisition of new land for them and to make life for the Palestinians so unpleasant and inconvenient that they will simply leave Biblical Israel and settle in some other Arab country, such as Jordan or Syria.
Netanyahu negotiates from a strong hand. Israel occupies or controls the entire area of Biblical Israel. There is only one way that the U.S. can force Israel to discontinue, even temporarily, the continuing acquisition of land and the building of new settlements. That way is to reduce or cut off the American foreign aid that goes to Israel. Israel is the largest beneficiary of American foreign aid. If we cut off the flow of money, Israel would rather quickly have to come to heel. It can not survive without the subsidy, in my opinion.
Cutting off or reducing the subsidy to Israel would raise hell politically here in the United States. The "jewish vote" is an important constituency of the Democratic Party and Representatives from districts with large Jewish populations would be up in arms about reducing the subsity. This constituency is predominantly liberal and progressive on other issues, and the Administration can not afford to alienate it lest, for example, the health care reform loses important support in this constituency.
In my humble opinion, Netanyahu and his supporters have no interest whatever in freezing the building of new settlements. His position is that there should not be a Palestinian state and that Jews from any part of the world have a God-given right to live anywhere they choose in Biblical Israel. His policy and that of the Likud Party is to continue construction of new settlements and the acquisition of new land for them and to make life for the Palestinians so unpleasant and inconvenient that they will simply leave Biblical Israel and settle in some other Arab country, such as Jordan or Syria.
Netanyahu negotiates from a strong hand. Israel occupies or controls the entire area of Biblical Israel. There is only one way that the U.S. can force Israel to discontinue, even temporarily, the continuing acquisition of land and the building of new settlements. That way is to reduce or cut off the American foreign aid that goes to Israel. Israel is the largest beneficiary of American foreign aid. If we cut off the flow of money, Israel would rather quickly have to come to heel. It can not survive without the subsidy, in my opinion.
Cutting off or reducing the subsidy to Israel would raise hell politically here in the United States. The "jewish vote" is an important constituency of the Democratic Party and Representatives from districts with large Jewish populations would be up in arms about reducing the subsity. This constituency is predominantly liberal and progressive on other issues, and the Administration can not afford to alienate it lest, for example, the health care reform loses important support in this constituency.
Labels: Netanyahu, rift between Israel and US, WAQF; Palestinian statehood; Hamas; Oslo peace process; Jewish settlements in Palestine;
