Loading

Posts Tagged ‘Benjamin Netanyahu’

Israel Authorizes 3000 Illegal Settlement Homes in Response to Palestinian Statehood

Ben Cohen · November 30,2012

It wasn’t enough for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to push the peace process back by assaulting Gaza and inflicting massive a massive humanitarian disaster on the area – he is now authorizing the construction of 3,000 illegal settlement homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem – to the dismay even of the United States. From Reuters:

Hours after the United Nations voted overwhelmingly to grant de-facto statehood to Palestine, Israel responded on Friday by announcing it was authorizing 3,000 new settler homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.  An official, who declined to be named, said the government had also decided to expedite planning work for thousands more homes in a geographically sensitive area close to Jerusalem that critics say would kill off Palestinian hopes of a viable state.  The decision was made on Thursday when it became clear that the U.N. General Assembly was set to upgrade the Palestinians’ status in the world body, making them a “non-member state”, as opposed to an “entity”, boosting their diplomatic clout.

The majority of the international community has made it clear that it supports Palestinian statehood and opposes the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian land – two facts the Israeli government is unwilling to swallow. As the Guardian notes:

The fact that Israel won the support of just nine countries, including the US, at the UN has caused a degree of alarm inside the Jewish state.

Israeli officials were shocked at the scale of European support for the Palestinian resolution, with France switching sides and Germany abandoning a pledge to vote against. Among EU nations, only the Czech Republic supported Israel.

Israel’s hardening stance is becoming so out of step with the international consensus that is putting itself at great risk going forward. The vicious response to the vote in the UN exemplifies the Israeli doctrine of disproportionate force and makes getting back to peace negotiations close to impossible – and that puts everyone else’s interests in the region at risk, particularly the United States.

Israel is engaging in the overt colonization of another country in full view of the world with no inkling of remorse. Its standing as a respected member of the international community is being irreparably damaged and it is only a matter of time before the status quo becomes untenable. Votes in favor of the Palestinians and condemnation of Israeli aggression and settlement activity in the international community are just the start. The measures against Israel are largely symbolic at the moment, but at some point they will become economic, and change will be imposed on them from the outside. Andrew Sullivan wrote this as Israel pummeled Gaza with hi-tech weaponry earlier in the month:

Without diplomacy toward a two-state solution, we are looking at a lifetime of constant Israeli warfare against all of its neighbors, deeper isolation in the region (with Turkey and Egypt already fast moving away) and growing international pariah status as Greater Israel becomes more fundamentalist and less democratic. And at some point, as America’s energy revolution leaves us less and less exposed to Middle East oil, and as the national interest becomes more attuned to events in Asia and the Pacific, and as the occupation turns Israel into the South Africa of the 21st Century, the Jewish state will become a self-evident burden for America, spawning terror and conflict and anti-Americanism as far as the eye can see. If all Israel can count on then are America’s Christianists and the current GOP, if they continue to spurn American attempts to unwind the conflict by undoing the settlements, then Israelis should be genuinely afraid for their future.

Sadly there are no signs they understand why they should be afraid. And that means there’s still no end in sight.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Son of Ariel Sharon Makes Frightening Gaza Comments

Ben Cohen · November 21,2012

Gilad Sharon: "Flatten Gaza"

 

Gilad Sharon, son of former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, has written a sickening op-ed in  the  Jerusalem Post expressing a desire to ‘flatten’ Gaza, and even, it seems, suggest using nuclear weapons against the impoverished refugees:

We need to flatten entire neighborhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza. The Americans didn’t stop with Hiroshima – the Japanese weren’t surrendering fast enough, so they hit Nagasaki, too.

There should be no electricity in Gaza, no gasoline or moving vehicles, nothing. Then they’d really call for a ceasefire.

According to Sharon, there it no such thing as an innocent Gazan – they elected Hamas, so must be collectively punished for the actions of their government:

The desire to prevent harm to innocent civilians in Gaza will ultimately lead to harming the truly innocent: the residents of southern Israel. The residents of Gaza are not innocent, they elected Hamas. The Gazans aren’t hostages; they chose this freely, and must live with the consequences.

I try to keep personal emotion out of my analysis, particularly when it comes to the situation in Israel. I am of Jewish heritage, so was initially blindly pro Israel before I understood the complex history of the region. I decided to keep ethnic pride out of the equation when assessing the conflict, and now understand the situation to be a tragic example of colonialism and occupation – sadly on behalf of my own people. While I am able to distance myself from the tribal emotion of it all, I can’t help but feel utterly depressed when reading dehumanizing hate mongering by figures like Gilad Sharon  – a Jew who should be ashamed of himself given the history of his own people.

Surely Sharon has read about ‘Kristallnacht’, the ‘Night of the broken glass’ – a horrific campaign of collective Jewish punishment lead by Dr. Goebbels after a lone Jew shot a German diplomat in Paris in 1938. If he hasn’t, he should, and compare the German mentality of dehumanization to his own.

Surely Sharon must understand that if Gazans are to be collectively punished for electing a particular government, then so too must Israelis. If Israel is allowed to  ‘flatten’ Gaza, then surely the Palestinians can return the favor for the election of Benjamin Netanyahu.

But of course he doesn’t, because Sharon is a bully versed only in the language of violence and intimidation. To call Sharon a racist would be an understatement – just look at an article he wrote for ‘Arutz Sheva’ comparing Palestinians to wild animals:

Let us not forget with whom we are dealing here. You can take the wild Palestinian beast and put a mask on it, in the form of some fluent English-speaking spokesman. You can also dress it in a three-piece suit and silk tie.

But every once in a while – during a new moon, or when a crow’s droppings hit a howling jackal, or when its pita with hyssop doesn’t come out just right – the wild beast senses that this is its night, and out of primeval instincts, it sets off to stalk its prey.

Comparisons to Nazis should not be made lightly, but in the case of Gilad Sharon, it’s entirely justified.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Clinton in Israel, Cease-Fire Remains Elusive

November 21,2012
israel_clinton_280

The Daily Banter Headline Grab. From AP:

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel and the Hamas militant group edged closer to a cease-fire Tuesday to end a weeklong Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip, but after a day of furious diplomatic efforts involving the U.S. secretary of state, U.N. chief and Egypt’s president, a deal remained elusive and fighting raged on both sides of the border.

Israeli tanks and gunboats pummeled targets in Gaza in what appeared to be a last-minute burst of fire, while at least 200 rockets were fired into Israel. As talks dragged on near midnight, Israeli and Hamas officials, communicating through Egyptian mediators, expressed hope that a deal would soon be reached, but cautioned that it was far from certain.

“If there is a possibility of achieving a long-term solution to this problem by diplomatic means, we prefer that. But if not, then I am sure you will understand that Israel will have to take whatever actions are necessary to defend its people,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a late-night meeting with visiting Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Clinton was hastily dispatched to the region by President Barack Obama to join a high-profile group of world leaders working to halt the violence. Standing alongside the Israeli leader, Clinton indicated it could take some time to iron out an agreement.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Netanyahu’s Attack on Gaza is about Re-election, Not Terrorism

Ben Cohen · November 16,2012
Screen shot 2012-11-16 at 12.15.44 PM
English: Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli politician

Benjamin Netanyahu: War, war and more war

By Ben Cohen: The world watches as the deteriorating situation in Gaza unfolds, unable to prevent either side from pulling back from the brink of war. With Israel gearing up for a full out assault on the impoverished area it has been occupying for decades, the chances for a peaceful resolution to the conflict that dates back to 1948 becomes ever more a distant dream.

There is a lot of noise surrounding the latest chapter in the violent conflict, and it is drowning out fact and context.  The situation is fast turning into a cheering game with supporters of both sides hurling inaccuracies and racial epithets at each other. If you are friends with Jews and Muslims, just log onto your Facebook account and look at the photos and quotes distributed across their newsfeeds. I’ve already had to delete obnoxious arguments on my own wall that descended into slanging matches rather than civilized debate.

While people are entitled to their own opinions, they are not entitled to their own facts. So here are some:

The latest outburst of violence began when Israeli tanks made an incursion into the Gaza strip and killed a 12 year old boy playing football. The two sides then engaged in back and forth attacks that was followed by a brief ceasefire.

Israel then broke the cease fire by assassinating Ahmed Jaabari, the commander of Ezedin al Qassam, the military wing of Hamas.

The Israeli government has gone to great lengths to explain why Jaabari was assassinated, with the IDF releasing the following ‘kill ad’ to be distributed across social networks:

Jabarifb1-640x640

What they did not explain is that Ahmed Jaabri was critical to ongoing long term cease fire talks between Hamas and Israel. Jaabri held enormous sway in negotiations because he had the power to keep militants in line at home, and make meaningful concessions to the Israelis. He was instrumental in the negotiated release of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, even personally escorting him to the Rafah crossing with Egypt. According to Gershon Baskin, the Co-Chairman of IPCRI, the Israel Palestine Center for Research and Information, Jaabri was key to a sustained ceasefire agreement with the Israelis. He writes in The Daily Beast:

Repeated rounds of rocket fire over the following year [after the release of Shalit] yielded the same results with both sides seeking a ladder to step down and avoid full escalation, which would not bring any political or military gains. Since that time, with the exception of the last round of violence two weeks ago, the rocket fire from Gaza was launched after a pre-emptive Israeli strike against terror cells. Based on Israeli intelligence information, pre-emptive strikes were conducted primarily against cells from the Islamic Jihad and the popular resistance committees. Hamas almost always sat on the sidelines and allowed the other factions in Gaza to shoot their rockets until the price in human life became too high. At that point, Hamas urged the Egyptians to intervene to secure a return to calm. In the last rounds, Hamas, under pressure from its public, joined in the shooting of rockets—but it almost always aimed its rockets at open spaces in Israel and their damage was minimal. It was clear to all involved that Hamas was not interested in escalating the situation and for its own reasons and agreed to impose the ceasefire on all of the other factions, and on itself.

The key actor on the Hamas side was Ahmed Jaabari, the commander of Ezedin al Qassam, the military wing of Hamas. When he was convinced that Israel was ready to stand down as well, Jaabari was always ready to take the orders to force the ceasefire on all of the other factions and on Hamas.

Baskin, who himself is deeply involved with back channel negotiations between the two sides, writes that a new proposal with his input was being drafted for a ceasefire, and Jaabri was tasked with checking reactions from Gaza.

Then, he was assassinated.

Why would Israel kill someone so crucial to what was left of the fragile ceasefire negotiations? The answer is simple, and you only have to go back to the last invasion of Gaza to see why it happened. ‘Operation Cast Lead’, the assault on Gaza in 2008 that left over 1,400 Palestinians dead occurred two months before Israeli elections. The latest assault on Gaza is again happening two months before the 2013 elections – enough time for Benjamin Netanyahu to get the public behind him in a time of war.

Politicians waging war to gain popularity is nothing new, and Netanyahu is reviving the age old tactic to entrench his leadership over Israel that is defined mostly by militaristic opposition to the Palestinians and Iran. Politicians like Netanyahu do not exist in peace time, so they need war to make them relevant. Sadly, innocent Israelis and Palestinians are paying the price of his vanity.

Regardless of who you believe is responsible for starting this particular round of violence, one thing is abundantly clear: That Israel has, and will kill many, many more Palestinians than Palestinians will kill Israelis. As Yousef Manayyer, Executive Director of The Jerusalem Fund writes:

Through September 2012, Israeli weaponry caused 55 Palestinian deaths and 257 injuries. Among these 312 casualties, 61, or roughly 20 percent, were children and 28 were female. 209 of these casualties came as a result of Israeli Air Force missiles, 69 from live ammunition fire, and 18 from tank shells. It is important to note that these figures do not represent a totality of Israeli projectiles fired into Gaza but rather only Israeli projectiles fired into Gaza which cause casualties. The total number of Israeli projectiles fired into Gaza is bound to be significantly larger.

For context, consider this: more Palestinians were killed in Gaza yesterday than Israelis have been killed by projectile fire from Gaza in the past three years.

The facts are getting harder and harder for Israel, and the world to ignore. It is illegally occupying and brutalizing the Gaza strip, a territory made up of mostly refugees (around 70% of the population) refused entrance to their ancestral land because Israel took it from them in 1948. Israel controls the airspace and territorial waters around Gaza and routinely makes illegal incursions across its borders. It has strangled Gaza economically via a military and trade blockade, causing untold misery to residents who are literally on the edge of existence. As Amnesty International reports:

Mass unemployment, extreme poverty and food price rises caused by shortages have left four in five Gazans dependent on humanitarian aid. As a form of collective punishment, Israel’s continuing blockade of Gaza is a flagrant violation of international law…..According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, the number of refugees living in abject poverty in the Gaza Strip has tripled since the blockade began. These families lack the means to purchase even the most basic items, including soap, school materials and clean drinking water. According to the UN, more than 60 per cent of households are currently “food insecure”.

It is not surprising that militants gain power in places like the Gaza strip and make a bad situation worse. The rockets launched into Israel, mostly by independent militant groups outside of Hamas, are not only immoral, but completely counterproductive. The more violence the Palestinians respond with to occupation, the more Israel inflicts upon them – and the means of destruction do not work in the Palestinians favor. The end result is always more dead people and fewer paths to peace. Militants gain power in violent situations and are rarely willing to concede, making negotiations close to impossible.

The US has predictably come down on the side of Israel, pledging its unyielding support for the Jewish state’s ‘Right to defend itself’ and condemning the rocket attacks from Hamas. Behind closed doors however, Obama will be seething as Netanyahu’s unilateral war mongering makes the White House’s fragile relationship with the Arab world ever more difficult.

It is hard to see a way out of the violence and get back to the remnants of the peace process unless serious pressure is placed on the Israelis to stop its brutalization of the Palestinian people, and the Palestinians are pressured to stop firing rockets into Israel. The United States and Egypt have the power coordinate meaningful pressure on either side, but as of yet, it hasn’t been applied successfully.

Netanyahu will most likely be re-elected next year after another round of war and lots of dead Palestinians – a price he is sadly always willing to pay.
And by any conservative estimation, prospects for peace going forward are now close to zero.

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

US Military Tells Israel not to Attack Iran – a Turning Point in Foreign Policy?

Ben Cohen · November 01,2012

The US military is now taking Israel’s increasingly belligerent rhetoric against Iran more seriously and is directly warning it not to take any action. The delicate and volatile situation puts the United State’s interests in the area in jeopardy and it is now calculating that confronting Israel and potentially offending its ally is the only way to prevent the situation from dangerously escalating. From the Guardian:

US military commanders have warned their Israeli counterparts that any action against Iran would severely limit the ability of American forces in the region to mount their own operations against the Iranian nuclear programme by cutting off vital logistical support from Gulf Arab allies.

US naval, air and ground forces are dependent for bases, refuelling and supplies on Gulf Arab rulers who are deeply concerned about the progress Iran has made in its nuclear programme, but also about the rising challenge to their regimes posed by the Arab spring and the galvanising impact on popular unrest of an Israeli attack on Iran.

The US Fifth Fleet is headquartered in Bahrain and the US air force has major bases in Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. Senior US officers believe the one case in which they could not rely fully on those bases for military operations against Iranian installations would be if Israel acted first.

I don’t think the US has any intentions of attacking Iran, at least under an Obama administration, so it is using the argument that an early Israeli attack would hamper its own military plans as a way of appearing to aggressively oppose Iran while pursuing a more intelligent response to the threat it perceives. The pentagon understand that another war in the Middle East would dangerously overstretch the military and embroil the US in a potentially lethal conflict with no viable exit strategy. The aftermath of a regime changing assault on Iran would be awful beyond belief, and a power vacuum would open up that could pull the entire region into chaos.

It’s clear that the US sees Iran as a threat to its interest in the region but it knows that it cannot pursue all out war against a country that 1. Has the ability to fight back, and 2. Wields serious influence in the region.

Under Netanyahu’s extremist neo con government in Israel, there is little thought for the consequences of war with Iran. Netanyahu would already be in Iran had the US not stopped it, understanding that Israel’s own survival is at stake. It marks a small but significant turning point in US foreign policy that it is now overtly telling Israel to back off. These small decisions make big impacts, furthering the argument that despite the ideological closeness of the US Presidential candidates, it does make a difference who is in power.

It is unclear whether Romney would commit to following Israel into a war with Iran, but his rhetoric suggests he would override his own military advisers and pursue Netanyahu’s strategy of all out aggression. Romney could of course change his mind should he get into office (and he certainly has a track record of doing so), but it’s probably not a bet the American public should make.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Netanyahu Government Set to Endorse More Illegal Settlements in West Bank

Ben Cohen · October 18,2012
English: Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli politician

Benjamin Netanyahu: More misery for the Palestinians (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

While distracting the world by parading silly diagrams of cartoon bombs around the UN and exaggerating the Iranian nuclear threat, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to approve legislation on illegal settlements in the West Bank. From the Guardian:

The Israeli cabinet may approve the legalisation of unauthorised Jewish settlement outposts in the West Bank, in a move likely to further damage peace prospects and result in censure from the international community.

The prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has indicated his intention to put sections of a government-commissioned report to a cabinet vote. However, the attorney general is reported to be opposed to the move before next year’s election. A spokesman for the prime minister said: “No decisions have been taken yet.”

Netanyahu is believed to be under pressure from extreme rightwing pro-settler elements within his party, Likud, in the runup to the election on 22 January. Israel Radio reported that the prime minister had instructed the cabinet secretary to draft a motion endorsing sections of the 89-page Levy report, which was published in July.

Incredibly the Levy report rejects the international legal consensus that the West Bank is under Israeli military occupation, and claims that the fourth Geneva convention does not apply to the West Bank as it is not technically a ‘foreign territory’  under the sovereignty of another state. If Netanyahu approves this legislation – set to go to a cabinet vote, the consequences will be catastrophic to what remains of the peace process. There is much opposition to this within the Israeli government itself, defense minister Ehud Barak stating:

Adopting the report will not bolster the settlement in Judea and Samaria [the biblical name for the West Bank], it will merely undermine Israel’s diplomacy efforts and further isolate Israel from the world.

The fact that politicians further to the Right of the fanatical Netanyahu have this type of influence over Israeli government policy is alarming to say the least, and it does not bode well for the statehood aspirations of the Palestinians. It’s hard to see how the peace process can move forward under the Netanyahu government without serious pressure from the United States.

There’s a chance that should Obama win a second term, he will start to exert real force on the Israelis to take the peace process seriously. Given Netanyahu’s flagrant disregard for him during his first term, it is a possibility that Obama will look to exact revenge. But given the United State’s consistently one sided approach to the conflict, it isn’t all that likely regardless of what Obama might want to do. The result? More misery for the Palestinians, more isolation for Israel, and more problems for the United States. It’s a vicious cycle that either America or Israel can stop in the blink of an eye, leaving the world wondering why on earth they don’t do a damn thing.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Why is the US Blocking Palestinian Statehood Aspirations?

Ben Cohen · October 01,2012
Screen shot 2012-10-01 at 1.53.04 PM
Cropped photo of Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas'...

Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas: Hopes of improved status continually smashed by Israel and the US (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

By Ben Cohen: The pretense that the United States is an honest broker in the Israeli/Palestinian crisis must now be completely dismissed from serious circles. From the Guardian:

The United States has warned European governments against supporting a Palestinian bid for enhanced status at the United Nations, saying such a move “would be extremely counterproductive” and threatening “significant negative consequences” for the Palestinian Authority, including financial sanctions.

A US memorandum, seen by the Guardian, said Palestinian statehood “can only be achieved via direct negotiations with the Israelis” and urged European governments “to support [American] efforts” to block the bid. The message was communicated by officials to representatives of European governments at the UN general assembly (UNGA) in New York last week.

Israel is militantly opposed to Palestinians gaining enhanced legal status internationally due to its illegal occupation of Palestinian territories and the blockade of Gaza. A successful resolution could potentially lead to Palestinian participation in international bodies like the International Criminal Court, where Israel could potentially be held legally accountable (at least superficially) for its behavior.

Israel and the US maintain that the only path to peace is through direct negotiations with the Palestinians, but given the Israelis have consistently derailed efforts to negotiate in good faith and the US has refused to reprimand Israel with any meaningful consequences, it is impossible to take their argument in good faith.

The US threat to Europe is serious. They will pull aid support to the Palestinians if their UN aspirations are backed by Europe leaving a significant funding gap that would have severe humanitarian consequences to the already impoverished Palestinians.

There is a deadly game being played by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who is banging the drums for war with Iran while Israel is amping up its increasingly brutal occupation of Palestinian territories. As Juan Cole writes:

Israeli squatters, backed by Netanyahu, are attempting to make a Palestinian state impossible. Netanyahu’s plan is to keep the Palestinians (some 12 million strong, 4 million of them in the Occupied Territories) stateless and without citizenship rights forever. People without a state have no institutions that would enforce their claims on property or on basic human rights, and so they are open to being treated, in a way, like slaves and constantly stolen from, as the Palestinians are.

Cole argues that Netanyahu’s ‘Iranian bomb’ theater is mostly an attempt to divert attention away from Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories. Iran, contrary to US and Israeli scare tactics, is not close to attaining a nuclear weapon, or even in the process of building one. He writes:

Iran can’t construct a nuclear weapon at all as long as it is being actively inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which it is (and yes, including the Fordo facility). There is no facility with uranium or enrichment facilities that is off limits to the IAEA inspectors. No country under active inspection by the UN has ever developed a nuclear weapon. Israel, which always refused such inspections, has some 400 nuclear warheads.

So while the world watches Netanyahu forge a path for war with Iran, it ignores what is happening to the Palestinians as a side issue. The United State’s complicity in this is not only immoral but completely counterproductive. It is widely viewed as being a dishonest partner in the peace process in the Middle East, and when it is uncovered that they are actively blocking Palestinian attempts to gain legitimacy as a nation within recognized international institutions, their image is tarnished further.

The violence and anti American sentiment we saw in Benghazi recently was not just the result of an insulting video, but the product of US foreign policy towards the region in general. The US is blocking Palestinian statehood aspirations for political expediency. In the short term, support for Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories helps American politicians shore up Jewish support and gives them a powerful military satellite in a largely hostile region. In the long term, Israeli treatment of Palestinians with explicit US support makes long standing peace an impossible task.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Method to Netanyahu’s Wackiness?

October 01,2012
Boris-badanov-bomb_280

By Paul R. Pillar: One naturally wonders what was going through the mind of the Israeli prime minister, or of his staff or speechwriters, when deciding to include in his address to the United Nations General Assembly such an obvious invitation for satire and ridicule. And on a deadly serious topic, which Mr. Netanyahu more than anyone has repeatedly proclaimed we ought to view in deadly serious terms.

I am referring, of course, to the drawing of a cartoon bomb that he used as a prop and on which he drew a red line with a marker while talking about imposing red lines on Iran’s nuclear program. A major topic of post-speech analysis has concerned which cartoons were possible sources of the bomb design.

Was it something Wile E. Coyote had used against Road Runner, or did it — and more evidence leans in this direction — come from Boris and Natasha on the old Rocky and Bullwinkle show? There are many satiric directions one could go with Netanyahu’s prop, and Photoshop-adept wags in Israel wasted no time in having fun with some of them.

Sometimes dumbing a topic down, even to the level of cartoons, has the advantage of getting a single point across clearly even at the expense of distorting or oversimplifying the rest of the topic. But if the point concerned where Netanyahu wanted to establish a red line for Iran’s nuclear program, he failed to clarify this and instead only confused.

The line he drew on his cartoon bomb indicated that what would be unacceptable would be any enrichment of uranium to the 90 percent (i.e., weapons-grade) level. If that is the line, there is no problem and no issue. Iran is doing no enrichment to that level and has given no indication of moving to that level. If it were to begin to make such a move, this would immediately be observed by the on-site inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency.

In his remarks, however, Netanyahu said Iran should not be permitted to “complete” medium-level (20 percent) enrichment. That is not only at odds with his graphic but also intrinsically unclear. What does “complete” mean, especially given that — this is something the prime minister never mentioned — more than half of the 20 percent-enriched uranium Iran has produced is being made into fuel plates for nuclear reactors and as such is no longer available for possible further enrichment to weapons grade?

All of this is, however, beside the point. We collectively give Netanyahu far too much credit for believing what he is saying and for being focused on technical details that he claims to be focused on.

His case for the Iranian nuclear program being some kind of grave, imminent threat does not stand up, and he is smart enough to realize it does not stand up. Thus he loses nothing through confusion, contradiction and silly graphics.

The idea that Iran is only a few months away from having a nuclear weapon simply does not conform with the facts regarding the status of its enrichment program and everything else that would be required to build a usable weapon. It does not conform with the weight of the evidence that Tehran hasn’t even decided to build a bomb.

What Netanyahu claimed about red lines and a threat of military attack being able to deter Iran from continuing its current nuclear program contradicts, as Tony Karon points out, the assertions about the supposed inability to deter Iran if it had a nuclear weapon, which is the main basis for all the alarmism in the first place about a nuclear-armed Iran.

This parallels the similar contradiction involved when those promoting the use of military force against Iran argue, as they often do, that Iran would be deterred from striking back forcefully.

As for the supposed horrors that would ensue if Iran did acquire a nuclear weapon, what Netanyahu had to say about that in his U.N. speech — such as suggesting that continued Iranian enrichment of uranium would somehow mean Al Qaeda having a nuclear weapon — was just as cartoonish as what he said about red lines, even if he did not have a graphic to go with it.

The use of even a satire-inducing prop becomes a little less puzzling if we do not take what Netanyahu is saying at face value but instead realize what he is trying to do, which is not to establish some technical case about timelines of the Iranian nuclear program. He is, for one thing, succeeding in getting our attention.

The above-the-fold portions of the front pages of Friday’s New York Times and Washington Post were dominated by a picture of Netanyahu holding up his cartoon bomb drawing.

If the Israeli prime minister looks somewhat looney by using something that could have come out of Looney Tunes, that only adds to building the image of himself as someone who might actually be crazy enough to start a war with Iran. His principal audience in this regard is not in Iran but instead in the United States.

The threat of dragging the United States into such a folly of a war serves in the first instance to increase the pressure for sanctions, subversion, and other dimensions of conflict with Iran short of overt military force. It also serves to box the U.S. president into a position in which if overt war comes, it is more likely to involve the United States and not just Israel.

Netanyahu’s agitation and saber-rattling, and the effects they have on U.S. policies, also help to subvert prospects for success in negotiations with Iran on the nuclear issue. They help, moreover, to prevent any broader U.S.-Iranian rapprochement, thus supporting the Israeli line that Israel is the only partner the United States can hope to have within a region full of threats and enemies.

All the agitation on Iran has diverted attention from topics that Netanyahu does not want to receive attention, which include above all the festering conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. A measure of how well this diversion of attention has succeeded is how little notice the Palestinian situation has received in reporting in the United States of the speeches at the General Assembly.

That includes coverage of the speech by Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi, who devoted much of his address to that topic and reminded his listeners that the Egyptian-Israeli peace agreement was only one-half of the Camp David accords, with promised progress on the Palestinian issue being the other.

Speaking of diversion of attention, note also how, in contrast to Netanyahu’s cartoon-aided presentation, relatively little comment has been given to the speech at the same podium the previous day by Iranian president Mahmoud Admadinejad.

Most comments just noted how rambling and ultimately boring Ahmadinejad’s speech was. The only things he said about Israel were to complain (and what Iranian president couldn’t or wouldn’t complain about this?) about all the Israeli threats and hostility directed against Iran.

There was no reference to map-wiping or any of the other rhetoric that has repeatedly been seized upon by those talking up an Iranian nuclear threat. It is interesting how when such snippets of rhetoric appear they are vigorously extrapolated into conclusions about future Iranian policy, but when they do not appear the absence is simply ignored.

Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency, rose to be one of the agency’s top analysts. He is now a visiting professor at Georgetown University for security studies. (This article first appeared as a blog post at The National Interest’s Web site. Reprinted with author’s permission.)

(Originally posted at Consortium News)

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Netanyahu Literally Draws a Red Line at the UN

Ben Cohen · September 27,2012

Pictured above is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu drawing a red line on an Iran bomb cartoon/diagram he brought to his speech at the UN. For reasons best known to himself, Netanyahu thought his audience needed a children's picture book bomb to illustrate the threat Israel believes Iran poses to peace in the Middle East - whether this helps or hurts his case is anyone's guess. The speech itself was nothing new - Netanyahu wants to go to war with Iran, and he's pushing the US to 'draw a red line' as well.

In a rebuttal to the Obama Administration's assertion that 'red lines' would do more to provoke the situation, Netanyahu laid out what he sees as the case for having definitive boundaries for the Iranian government:

"Red lines don't lead to war, red lines prevent war. Nothing could imperil the world more than a nuclear-armed Iran."

Everyone knows that the Israelis have nuclear weapons (despite the official line) so of course Netanyahu never puts forward an argument as to why they should be allowed them and no one else in the Middle East. But then that's the point - it's one rule for the Israelis and another for the Arabs. Israel will never cede its not-so-secret nuclear arsenal, but Iran is not allowed to develop one. Israel will never cede authority over its airspace or borderlines, but the Palestinians are expected to.

This dichotomy is getting harder and harder to justify, and the more Netanyahu pushes, the more resistance from the global community he's finding. Even the US, a staunch and virtually unquestioning ally is not on board with Netanyahu's plans, so perhaps its best he tones it down a bit. After all, the US bankrolls the Israeli military with several billion dollars a year, and they don't want that money going on blowing Iran to pieces. If Netanyahu continues to push, the ramification won't be political, they'll be economic.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Netanyahu’s ‘Red Line’ on Obama

September 26,2012
obama_netanyahu_280

By Lawrence Davidson: Much is being made of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s involvement in the on-going American presidential campaign. His public stance has been characterized as an Israeli effort to “openly…topple [President] Obama.”

The truth is that the only thing unusual about this meddling is its open and advertised nature. In a more discreet fashion, Zionist pressure bordering on blackmail and bribery goes on every day. I have written elsewhere about this corrupting process that I call “lobbification.“ In brief, this is how it operates:

Israeli Prime Minister and U.S. President Barack Obama during an Oval Office meeting on May 18, 2009. (Photo credit: White House)

Step One: A lobbyist, in this case someone from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), approaches Congresspersons or Senators. At some point in time that means every single one of them has been approached: all 435 voting members of Congress and every one of the 100 voting members of the Senate. Party affiliation is not an issue here.

Step Two: The lobbyist offers to organize financial campaign assistance, positive media coverage, briefings on situations in the Middle East, trips to Israel, etc.

Step Three: All that is asked in return is that the recipient consistently vote in a pro-Israel way. In other words, AIPAC wants the politician to surrender a part of his or her mind to the lobby — that part that might exercise critical and considered judgment on issues pertaining to Israel.

Step Four: There are several unspoken, but publicly acknowledged, consequences of turning down this offer, or alternatively, managing to get elected on your own and then voting the wrong way.

If you say no, the same offer will be made to your opponent both at the primary and general election levels. If you are elected and vote against Israel, AIPAC will do all it can, sooner or later, to see you defeated. It has a good record of turning such people out of office.

Step Five: If you sign up for this Faustian bargain and are elected, the lobby becomes your permanent partner. It is a constant presence. Its agents are always hovering about, rating your performance, letting you know they are there. Prove yourself reliable and they will underwrite you for life.

The President and Red Lines

President Obama made this bargain as solidly as have most other politicians in Washington. You can witness him affirming and reaffirming this deal in front of AIPAC conventions, while addressing the United Nations General Assembly, on those rare occasions when he addresses the press, and whenever else he feels it is politically necessary. He was even willing to debase his own national party convention (by altering the platform to say that Jerusalem must be Israel’s undivided capital) to make a point of his loyalty to the Israel lobby.

Yet all this has proven insufficient. The issue over which Obama has fallen short is Iran.

Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu (the deus ex machina of the Israel lobby) insists that Iran is preparing to build nuclear weapons and, taking that assumption on faith, their nuclear energy program should be stopped or placed under international control.

It should be noted that, back in 2002, Netanyahu incorrectly made the same charge against Iraq and that today, just as in 2002, there is no real evidence for his assertion about Iran’s aims. All U.S. intelligence agencies agree that the Iranians are not presently developing nuclear weapons.

Nonetheless, Netanyahu, who appears prone to OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder) when it comes to other people’s nuclear programs, demands that Washington set “red lines” for Tehran which, if crossed, would trigger U.S. military action.

In other words, on the basis of unsupported Zionist fears, the Israeli government is trying to maneuver the United States into yet another Middle East war. To his credit, President Obama has refused to comply with the demand for “red lines.”

The standard retribution practiced by the Israel lobby against a recalcitrant American politician is to try to get him or her kicked out of office. Usually this is done in a low-key way and most Americans don’t even know it is happening. But this time the act of revenge, driven by an egocentric and bellicose Israeli prime minister, is being carried out in full public view. Here are some of the ways Netanyahu is doing this:

1. Netanyahu has joined Mitt Romney in accusing Barack Obama of being too easy on Iran and too unresponsive to an ally, Israel.

2. Netanyahu has acquiesced in the use of his image and words in a blatantly false and distorted media campaign that accuses Obama of being “cozy” with the Society of Muslim Brotherhood.

3. Netanyahu has asserted that Obama has “no moral right” to pressure Israel not to attack Iran. What the Prime Minister leaves out is that such an attack would constitute aggression under international law and violate treaties to which both the U.S. and Israel are signatories. Under these circumstances it would be immoral if President Obama did not pressure Israel to hold its fire.

4. When accused of interfering in the presidential elections, Netanyahu has replied, “This is not an electoral issue. … I think there is a common interest of all Americans of all persuasions to stop Iran.”

The bit about this not being “electoral” is clearly disingenuous. If Netanyahu wants to hold an opinion about alleged common interests that is fine. However, if as the head of a foreign government, he publicly and repeatedly asserts that opinion in ways that aid one candidate for president over another, he has certainly made both himself and his opinion, an “electoral issue.”

There is speculation that, if Mr. Obama is reelected, then Prime Minister Netanyahu’s indiscreet behavior might result in “a sea change in U.S.-Israeli relations.” Unfortunately this is highly unlikely. The system of “lobbification” is solidly in place at the national political level. When it comes to Israel, only two things are likely to change it:

1. Meaningful campaign finance reform that would free politicians from their present reliance on lobby affiliated contributions.

2. The Israel-American connection becomes a voting issue such that continued blind support for Israel hurts a politician’s chance of election.

Neither of these possibilities seem to be on the horizon. It is the way the U.S. political system is run that makes politicians so vulnerable to lobby power. The fact that there are some lobbies out there that have decent and humane goals is not sufficient to justify a system that otherwise does so much damage.

For instance, under the present circumstances it is impossible to define the national interest in an objective way. As it stands, the national interest is replaced by the parochial interests of lobbies that are successful at suborning Congress and the White House — Zionists pushing support for a racist and expansionist foreign power, Cuban-Americans carrying on a 53-year-old vendetta against the government in Havana, the NRA striving to protect the right of every American to own a submachine gun, and the like.

In large part it comes down to money and how it is used to manipulate leaders and parties. There is something age-old about this situation. It was the Roman Senator and master rhetorician Cicero (108 to 43 BCE) who said “Nihil tam munitum quod non expugnari pecunia possit.” Translated as: “No fortification is such that it cannot be subdued with money.” That is still the rule by which lobbyists live.

Lawrence Davidson is a history professor at West Chester University in Pennsylvania. He is the author of Foreign Policy Inc.: Privatizing America’s National Interest; America’s Palestine: Popular and Official Perceptions from Balfour to Israeli Statehood; and Islamic Fundamentalism.

(Originally posted at ConsortiumNews.com)

Enhanced by Zemanta

Subscribe

avatar

Ben Cohen's feed

Enter email below:

Copyright © 2013 BanterMediaGroup, L.L.C. All rights reserved.