Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Adventurer]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The NationBlogsThe Dreyfuss Report

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Obama Fails in Middle East posted by Robert Dreyfuss on 11/06/2009 @ 08:56am


Take ActionComments (105)Subscribe NowText SizeAAA.The announcement by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas that he will not run for reelection is the exclamation point on the utter collapse of the Obama adminstration's Middle East policy. Launched to great expectations -- the appointment of George Mitchell, Obama's Cairo declaration that the plight of the Palestinians is intolerable -- it is now in complete disarray. It is, without doubt, the first major defeat for Obama's hope-and-change foreign policy.

Here's how it unraveled. First, Obama began a test of strength with Israel over that country's policy of illegal settlements, an expansion of its occupation of the West Bank driven by extremist, right-wing settlers who are fanatical, Bible-believing cultists who think that Israel has some God-given right to that territory. The settler-kooks -- indeed, one of their past leaders was named Rabbi Kook -- are supported by ultra-hardliners in Israel's security establishment, who see the West Bank as strategic depth in Israel's defense posture. What happened after Obama told Israel it had to stop settlements? Nothing. Score: Netanyahu 1, Obama 0.

Next, the Obama adminstration capitulated, refusing to insist on any penalty for Israel's defiant intransigence. Not even a hint of any retaliation by the United States to enforce what it had called the path to a peace deal. No talk of reducing US aid to Israel, or cutting back on US-Israeli military cooperation, or anything. Score: Netanyahu 2, Obama 0.

Then, while all this was going on, Obama hinted that he might announce, this fall, something like a comprehensive US plan for the Middle East. Everyone knows what a solution looks like: withdrawal by Israel from the West Bank, dismantling of the settlements, an end to the Gaza embargo, the division of Jerusalem, some swapping of land to account for slight changes in borders (especially around the capital), and a formula to account for the Palestinians' right-of-return, involving financial compensation -- plus security arrangements. But months later, Obama has refused to even hint at his own plan for the region, caving in to Israel's demands that all of that be saved for "negotiations." Score: Netanyahu 3, Obama 0.

Finally, the United States cravenly supported Israel over the Goldstone Report on Gaza, the report that accused Israel (and Hamas) of war crimes during the December-January conflict there. Score: Netanyahu 4, Obama 0.

[Reduced in length for posting]

Abbas said that he was "surprised" -- bitterly angry and really pissed off, is more accurate, I am sure -- by Clinton's comments on Israel's settlements policy. And Clinton, asked about Abbas' move, delivered an insouciant f******-you to Abbas: "We talked about his own political future. I look forward to working with President Abbas in any new capacity."

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/493335/obama_fails_in_middle_east

[ytuque]

[Adventurer]

Actually, some of the settlers are zealots for Zion and religious fanatics and say they must conquer the land in some religious manifest destiny way and invoke God. To say that is not true is a denial of the reality. Some of the settlers are definitely secular and some are definitely religious. Disproportionately when compared to Israelis behind the Green Line, they are far more religious in general. I am not comparing them to Mea Sharim or certain parts of Jerusalem. I mean compared to Tel Aviv, Haifa, Acco/Acre, Yaffo/Jaffa, and the Galilee. There is a huge difference between the settlers percentage wise and the rest of the Israeli population, but they have a huge influence on Israeli politics because they account for 10% of the Jewish population now. Obviously, Lieberman is secular and is a settler. He is a zealot of a different kind, a nationalist zealot, if you will.