Accidental Blogger

A general interest blog

WASHINGTON—State Department diplomat Nelson Milstrand, who appeared on CNN last week and offered an informed, thoughtful analysis implying that Israel could perhaps exercise more restraint toward Palestinian moderates in disputed territories, was asked to resign Tuesday. “The United States deeply regrets any harm Mr. Milstrand’s careful, even-tempered, and factually accurate remarks may have caused our democratic partner in the Middle East,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in an unequivocal condemnation of the veteran foreign-service officer’s perfectly reasonable statements. “U.S. policy toward Israel continues to be one of unconditional support and fawning sycophancy.” Milstrand, 63, will reportedly appear at an AIPAC conference to offer a full apology as soon as his trial concludes and his divorce is finalized.

Granted, this is from the Onion. But it encapsulates accurately the cowardliness of US politicians in handling the Israel-Palestine peace negotiations. Although American presidents, including Bill Clinton and George W. Bush have made attempts to be even handed on the matter, they have done so with caution making sure that their re-election chances were not jeopardized by honesty or  fairness. President Obama, emboldened perhaps by his success in eliminating Osama bin Laden, went out on a limb and called on both Israelis and Palestinians to take a serious look at creating a Palestinian state with mutually acceptable borders before his election for a second term. Whether this is a courageous move or a foohardy gamble, we will find out in a year and a half.

Even though Obama's views are almost identical to what Bush had proposed in 2008 and what Clinton had hinted at, it is being interpreted by Israel's hard line American supporters as throwing Israel under the bus and sympathetic towards Hamas. The distortions and lies come hardly as a surprise to Americans who have watched the same old theater for decades. The irony is that most Americans do want to see a Palestinian state and an end to Israeli-Palestinian hostilities. So it was especially disgusting to watch our elected representatives behave like trained circus seals who rose up and repeatedly applauded right wing Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent speech to Congress.  Netanyahu had no intention to come across as a negotiator for peace. His objective was incendiary and misleading demagoguery and he succeded in that with usual aplomb. The reason that this tired old rhetoric will once again not receive the scrutiny of ordinary American voters is that the never ending mid-east mess is not very high up on their priority list, despite general support for an independent Palestinian state and peace between the warring populations, as reflected in numerious polls. But our elected officials of both parties are scared to death of the AIPAC and the rapture-friendly conservative Christians and they know that they will not pay a political price for ignoring the sentiment of the majority and pandering to the reactionaries. That is why a fiercely partisan but small group of Israel supporters repeatedly get away with putting a kibosh on all serious peace negotiations. Let us see if despite Obama's steely resolve and success in getting Osama bin Laden and the Republican Mediscare, whether the right wing will be able to sink him in 2012 by wrapping the albatross of Israel-Palestine around his neck.

Obama-Netanyahu-2011 

Here are some reactions to Obama and Netanyahu's speeches:

From the Washington post, here and here, from the BBC and from the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz (this is from the reliably left wing Gideon Levy). Note the reference to the standing ovations to Netanyahu's speech.

Posted in

7 responses to “Israel, the real Third Rail of US politics”

  1. The money from AIPAC counts for a lot as an incentive for the ‘trained circus seals’- What an apt comparison, no wonder they are only too eager to balance balls on their noses for a fish or two.
    I get the impression that Obama is playing a different game here: Obama gets Netanyahu and hardliners in Israel in a tizzy over the framing of a relatively innocuous restatement of existing US position, the media blares it as a defeat for /faux pas by Obama, Netanyahu appears good to the hardliners and worse to the moderates at home in Israel, what happens next in the Israeli election cycle is anyone’s guess.As for the current reactions, will Netanyahu think he is in a position of power from the negotiating standpoint and therefore a tad more willing to garner glory as a peacemaker? Or will he feel cornered and become more intransigent and refuse negotiations? Carrots vs. Sticks, in a slightly different mode, taking into account the way the media loves to frame these events.

    Like

  2. I have a suspicion that Obama is being supported here by liberal American Jews who may be sick of the impasse in Israel-Palestine and see the hypocrisy of America’s so called “pro-democracy, pro-freedom” stance in the rest of the middle east.
    And as my daughter pointed out, why was Biden joining in the standing ovation? Isn’t he with his own boss, the president?

    Like

  3. “[I]t encapsulates accurately the cowardliness of [some] US politicians in handling the Israel-Palestine peace negotiations.”
    AGREED!!!

    Like

  4. if obama can push thru his arab-israeli peace deal undiluted (respecting pre-war borders and all), he’ll go down in history as the president who boldly addressed the root cause of terrorism which is the greatest threat to world peace now.the same tenacity he showed with the health policy and bin laden pursuit can win him this war too – despite pro israel lobby. hope he does this, tho efforts at damage control makes me skeptical.
    strange how lobbies in various countries thrive on keeping alive peace-threatening issues for political expediency. such lobbies are fed by irrational hatred and mulish adherence to a once taken position. their fanaticism does not allow such thoughts as changing with changing times. lobbies in pakistan need to keep alive Kashmir issue. arab israeli deadend too is a political imperative for certain groups.
    only pro active citizens can change this. guess referendums on this issue would shouw that only a handful wants to keep the outdated pots boiing.but then, many political systems dont provide for referenndums.

    Like

  5. Joe

    Well said.

    Like

  6. It is often said that Social Security is “the third rail” of our political life; touch it, and die a screaming, horrid death. I don’t think so. Trying to have a realistic discussion of our policy towards the nation-state of Israel causes everyone in mainstream and right-wing politics (increasingly difficult to distinguish) to lose whatever equanimity they might possess and start frothing at the mouth.

    Like

  7. Notwithstanding the “riskpref English” terminology, your version (1) corresponds with my understanding of the situation which is roughly as follows:
    When PM Netanyahu become PM, the Palestinian Authority precondition for resuming the negotiations that broke off in late 2008 was that Israel must halt all construction of housing for its Jewish citizens in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

    Like

Leave a reply to Sujatha Cancel reply