Gideon Levy, writing in Haaretz, is right on the money when he advises president-elect Obama not to be a "good friend of Israel" - for good reason:
"The march of parochialism started right away. The tears of excitement invoked by U.S. president-elect Barack Obama's wonderful speech had not yet dried, and back here people were already delving into the only real question they could think to ask: Is this good or bad for Israel? One after another, the analysts and politicians got up - all of them representing one single school of thought, of course and began prophesizing.
They spoke with the caution that the situation required, gritting their teeth as though their mouths were full of pebbles, trying to soothe all the fears and concerns. They searched and found signs in Obama: The promising appointment of the Israeli ex-patriots' son, whose father belonged to the Irgun, and maybe also Dennis Ross and Dan Kurtzer and Martin Indyk, who may, God willing, be included in the new administration.
But in the background, a dark cloud hovered above. Careful, danger. The black man, who had associated with Palestinian expats, who speaks of human rights, who favors diplomacy over war, who even wants to engage Iran in dialogue, who will allocate more funding for America's social needs than to weapons exports. He may not be the sort of "friend of Israel" that we have come to love in Washington, the kind of friend we have grown accustomed to.
What's the panic all about? The truth needs to be said: At the base of all of these fears is the angst that this president will push Israel to end the occupation and move toward peace.
Well, maybe Obama will not be a "friend of Israel." May the great change he is promising not omit his country's Mideast policy. May Obama herald not only a new America, but also a new Middle East.
When we say that someone is a "friend of Israel" we mean a friend of the occupation, a believer in Israel's self-armament, a fan of its language of strength and a supporter of all its regional delusions. When we say someone is a "friend of Israel" we mean someone who will give Israel a carte blanche for any violent adventure it desires, for rejecting peace and for building in the territories."
Read the full piece here. Meanwhile, also from Haaretz:
- PM Olmert at a commemoration for slain PM Rabin saying: "We must also give up Arab neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem and return to the seed of the territory that is the State of Israel up until 1967, with obligatory amendments as a result of the reality created in the meantime," Olmert said referring to land captured by Israel during the 1967 Six-Day War."
- an editorial: "Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, the ousted prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, described "the territories of 1967" as the territory of the Palestinian state "at this time." He told Haaretz correspondent Amira Hass that the Hamas government had previously made it clear that it was willing to accept a Palestinian state that followed the 1967 borders and to offer Israel a long-term hudna, or truce, if Israel recognized the Palestinians' national rights, as Haaretz reported Sunday.
At first glance, it appears Haniyeh was not saying anything fundamentally different from what he said two years ago. But Haniyeh's comments are imbued with special significance against the backdrop of recent events in the Gaza Strip and the exchanges of fire that put the current lull at risk, along with the presidential election results in the United States and Khaled Meshal's statements that Hamas is willing to negotiate with the new American government. This is also the case in light of the efforts to foster a reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas and the nearly completed term of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas."
-
"The march of parochialism started right away. The tears of excitement invoked by U.S. president-elect Barack Obama's wonderful speech had not yet dried, and back here people were already delving into the only real question they could think to ask: Is this good or bad for Israel? One after another, the analysts and politicians got up - all of them representing one single school of thought, of course and began prophesizing.
They spoke with the caution that the situation required, gritting their teeth as though their mouths were full of pebbles, trying to soothe all the fears and concerns. They searched and found signs in Obama: The promising appointment of the Israeli ex-patriots' son, whose father belonged to the Irgun, and maybe also Dennis Ross and Dan Kurtzer and Martin Indyk, who may, God willing, be included in the new administration.
But in the background, a dark cloud hovered above. Careful, danger. The black man, who had associated with Palestinian expats, who speaks of human rights, who favors diplomacy over war, who even wants to engage Iran in dialogue, who will allocate more funding for America's social needs than to weapons exports. He may not be the sort of "friend of Israel" that we have come to love in Washington, the kind of friend we have grown accustomed to.
What's the panic all about? The truth needs to be said: At the base of all of these fears is the angst that this president will push Israel to end the occupation and move toward peace.
Well, maybe Obama will not be a "friend of Israel." May the great change he is promising not omit his country's Mideast policy. May Obama herald not only a new America, but also a new Middle East.
When we say that someone is a "friend of Israel" we mean a friend of the occupation, a believer in Israel's self-armament, a fan of its language of strength and a supporter of all its regional delusions. When we say someone is a "friend of Israel" we mean someone who will give Israel a carte blanche for any violent adventure it desires, for rejecting peace and for building in the territories."
Read the full piece here. Meanwhile, also from Haaretz:
- PM Olmert at a commemoration for slain PM Rabin saying: "We must also give up Arab neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem and return to the seed of the territory that is the State of Israel up until 1967, with obligatory amendments as a result of the reality created in the meantime," Olmert said referring to land captured by Israel during the 1967 Six-Day War."
- an editorial: "Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, the ousted prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, described "the territories of 1967" as the territory of the Palestinian state "at this time." He told Haaretz correspondent Amira Hass that the Hamas government had previously made it clear that it was willing to accept a Palestinian state that followed the 1967 borders and to offer Israel a long-term hudna, or truce, if Israel recognized the Palestinians' national rights, as Haaretz reported Sunday.
At first glance, it appears Haniyeh was not saying anything fundamentally different from what he said two years ago. But Haniyeh's comments are imbued with special significance against the backdrop of recent events in the Gaza Strip and the exchanges of fire that put the current lull at risk, along with the presidential election results in the United States and Khaled Meshal's statements that Hamas is willing to negotiate with the new American government. This is also the case in light of the efforts to foster a reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas and the nearly completed term of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas."
-
Comments