Message: do not fuck with the Jews.Trash-talking from across an ocean. That'll show em Marty. It's wrong but I've almost--almost--stopped reading about anything dealing with the Israel-Palestinian beef. It just feels like nothing changes. I've never understood why anyone in their right mind would accept us as an honest broker, given our declared allegiances. But more than that, I wonder why it's incumbent on us to broker at all. Lately, our judgment hasn't exactly been the greatest either.
« Karl Rove on Bush's reading | Main | I could have Peter King's job » What's beef...29 Dec 2008 11:00 am
Yglesias points us to Peretz chest-thumping analysis of Gaza:
Comments (49)Comments on this entry have been closed. |
Today's Headlines From The Atlantic |
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
But more than that, I wonder why it's incumbent on us to broker at all.
Well, fine, whatever. But if we're not going to be involved in the peace process, we could at least stop subsidizing the occupation, too.
Deleted. You're on the wrong blog.
Greenwald takes it to Peretz too.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/12/28/peretz/index.html
"It's wrong but I've almost--almost--stopped reading about anything dealing with the Israel-Palestinian beef. It just feels like nothing changes."
Me too. I'm so weary of the whole thing I'm dangerously close to the point where I descend into the none too desirable "fuck them all" mindset.
I wondered if this "action" was taken while Bush still held office; if there was a notion that such military incursions wouldn't be as easy with a President Obama across the ocean.
As a rule of thumb, one which holds true for American as for foreign affairs, if Peretz says it, it is wrong, if he advocates it, do the opposite. He's a sort of negative index of reality.
I don't think Israel is that fearful of an Obama Presidency, more importent to them is that they have their own elections coming. The mainstream of the Democratic party is solidly in the pro-Israel camp. you have to move further to left or into Buchanon territory to find politicos who will push against Israel.
That bit of bluster from Peretz is predictably dumb. But not all of what he says is idiotic. Hamas lauched 300+ plus rockets into southern Israel the week before Israel retaliated. How long would we stand for the North Koreans rocketing San Francisco before we fired back??
Gazans had a chance to put the rockets away and begin building a civil society after Israel's withdrawal---and I believe the large majority of them wanted to. But they elected hardline elements that destroyed that dream in favor of war with Israel. I don't like seeing Israeli rockets launched into densely populated ghettos, but what really are they supposd to do when Hamas situates ready-to-fire rocket launchers next to hospitals and homes? I think this is part of Peretz's larger point and I don't think it should be excused by his ill-advised bluster.
Dragnet, you miss out the fact that Israel has seized land, permitted illegal settlements, violated its treaties, and generally refused to negotiate seriously for over a generation. Also, when I last checked, the body count for this last episode was Palestinians 270 Israelis 1. That's pretty one-sided. Most Gazans have never been given a chance a decent life, and Israel is as responsible and arguably more so than Hamas.
It might be worth re-reading the first chapter "Hamas Rules" from Thomas L. Friedman's From Beirut to Jerusalem
Deleted.
Deleted. Man are we all just recovering from the holiday hangover?
OT Coates:
Tough Love or Too Tough?
http://www.presstelegram.com/ci_11249330
Old School parenting Coates.
PS - I feel like you about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Plus, the timing is ' suspect' to me.
o.k., how about this guy then as balance to TLF
Rami George Khouri is a Palestinian-Jordanian and US citizen whose family resides in Beirut, Amman, and Nazareth.
He is the Director of the Issam Fares Institute of Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut as well as editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star newspaper, published throughout the Middle East with the International Herald Tribune. He is an internationally syndicated political columnist and author.
http://www.ramikhouri.com/
Oh, man, oh, man. Peretz + Palestine = drivel.
TNC, I'm with you about the whole issue. I have sympathy with both sides, and take gross exception to the manner in which both sides have chosen to work through their grievances. I have nothing constructive to say, and it seems like very few other people do, either.
We're not a broker.
We're participants. Our money and weapons make Israel possible. Our money and weapons also make Egypt and Jordan and Saudi Arabia different than they would be if we got out.
Since we're in the fight already, we also have to participate in efforts to make things better. WE have to aim for fewer funeral, burning houses, imploded schools, and closed borders.
We get a special role because we're big, but it's not broker or referee.
Yes, it's exhausting and stupid. We have to play in the rain. The people who live there have to play in the rain, barefoot, on a a dirt field. The people who live in Gaza have to play in the rain, barefoot, on a dirt field, with a broken thumb and the flu.
Relatively speaking, our share is easy, and we should be doing it a whole lot better.
You've got a point. We've (the U.S.) pretty much forfeited are right to be an honest, unbiased and objective peacemaker here.
I wondered if this "action" was taken while Bush still held office; if there was a notion that such military incursions wouldn't be as easy with a President Obama across the ocean.
I suspect any timing relative to American politics was more to prevent Obama from needing to take a position than based on assumption that he would make things more difficult for Israel.
I'm not sure anyone honestly considers us an honest broker. (Who would be an honest broker, btw? China?) We're just the only ones with the flex to make Israel swallow its medicine.
Getting us to twist their arms looks very very tricky, but not as tricky as getting Israel to make concessions of its own accord.
We're at the point now where blame is irrelevant to the discussion. People can point fingers all they want, but the reality is that both sides--Palestinian and Israeli--have done inexcusable stuff to each other. Everyone is responsible. No one is on the side of angels here, and to refuse to acknowledge that is to be part of the problem.
ITA Coates. I am also ready to give Father Abraham's childen a time out. If it werent' for oil and religion we'd ignore them just like we ignore the Congo, Sudan, Burma and all other people of color who are trying to kill each other over land and resource disputes. I'm just sick of all of it. Normally I'm all for humanitarian intervention, but lately I'm an isolationist and want to focus on are own problems, which are many.
I've got the same attitude towards these conflicts as "black on black" crime. Unless murder, mayhem and conflict are an addiction, just fucking stop it. There's not a damn thing we can do to stop this nihilism. Maybe if we stop funding both sides they'll run out of money to fight. I've got enough energy to shack my head, but not enough to care anymore about people bound and determined to act a fool every chance they get. I don't have a side, I just don't think we can do anything about such reckless hate.
What is this 3 months on the ATL and no greatest mc discussion? Now that's Beef (hehx2)
TC, the virtual comforts of the Atlantic have made you soft like the "Cowgirls" (Hysterical).
No comment on the B.I.G. Bio Flick or How Kanye should stop singing. To paraphase the Wu , "Kids could read Ta-nehisi's blog and not have to go to summer school"
jb
Fair enough. I don't want to dismiss the substantial chicanery of the Israelis. In particular, I think the ever-expanding settler movement is particularly loathsome and destructive. But it is worth pointing out that Israel has at least taken some concrete steps toward peace (not enough, but some). They pulled out of Gaza, have tried to work with and strength Abbas, have put the Golan Heights on the table with the Syrians, etc. And it's a bit much to say that Israel has refused to negotiate seriously. Oslo and what Barak offered in 1998 were, I think, serious attempts at laying the groundwork for a workable two state solution. What has Hamas done that compares?
And I don't think it's fair to just tally up the body count and accuse one side of being disproportinate based on those figures. Hamas uses Palestinian civilians as human shields. Hamas fires rockets indiscrimininately at towns hoping to kill whomever. Who knows what they would do if they had more accurate weapons? Israel fires at rocket launchers (that are poised to kill Israeli civilians) and militant training camps that are purposely positioned in Gazan population centers. This distinction is not insignificant.
And let's not forget that vast majority of the Palestinian dead are Hamas security men. This doesn't excuse the fact that Israel has killed and wounded Palestinian civilians, but airing this I believe provides a more complete picture.
Once again, I think it's best to ask ourselves what we would do or consider acceptable if San Francisco or Seattle were rocketed continuously for an entire year. Now ask why we should expect the Israelis to do any differently.
Those of you who cannot bring yourselves to pay attention to the Israeli/Palestinian beef are the ones who passively enable it to continue.
Play deaf, dumb, and blind to this conflict, or worse yet, have a one-sided opinion based on biased headlines and then play deaf, dumb, and blind.
What do you get for that?
You get politicians who grovel before those who are not too lazy to advance their agenda. You also get more of the same foreign policy that you think you just voted out of office.
Give it some thought. A 60+ year occupation and one of the world's worst humanitarian crises at the moment.
This is not about ideology and it is not even about terrorism. It is about real estate and resources, mostly water. It is about the land and who is going to own it.
The consequences of continually ignoring this may be more dire than you think.
What a mess. You aren't going to stop violence by using violence unless you intend to annihilate the people you're fighting against.
If you kill a young kids mother and father, what do you reckon the chances are that that little kid will grow up into a young man who wants some revenge of his own?
This is a sad, senseless and stupidly endless cycle.
For some reason Israel-Palestinian beef reminds me of the Bloods v the Crips. They are all related in some way, the organizations and countries were started for good reasons that eventually causes the beef and they live in the same hood. The difference between the Bloods v Crips and the Israel-Palestinian beef is that the Israel-Palestinian beef has been going on for a few more years and the Israel-Palestinian folks have a few more street corners to fight on.
All the neocons remind me of the crowd that gathered in high school whenever a beef happened. The old "Hey, let's you and him fight!" mentality. It's easy to support war when you and nobody you know will get shot at.
As an Israeli, I have nothing to say on the matter except.... blurg. The whole thing makes me ill.
As a lover of language, TNC: please put the word analysis in quotations of you ever apply it to something like that again. Seriously. If that's analysis, then we can fire all of you journalists and replace it with the guys I went to middle school with and just find a prepubescent teen to spout off whatever they think it's cool to say about an issue.
The economy? "It sucks."
Israel-Palestine? "Don't fuck with the Jews."
Iraq? "Man we fucked that up."
Inner-city crime: "Someone tries to mug ME I'll rough THEM up."
So please. That's "analysis." Not analysis.
Why we should be concerned if for no other reason
http://www.juancole.com/#Sistani
TNC, you usually wax intelligently and reflectively, but this was a pretty airy post. We are a broker not necessarily because we don't have (declared) allegiances, but because we have the power and influence necessary to be a broker. Lack thereof would be a reason that Iceland, for instnace, could not be a broker.
Also, while we have declared our allegiances, as you say, so too has the majority of the world. So if no one in their right mind would accept us as an honest broker, who exactly would this Person in their Right Mind accept? China or Russia? The UN? Do we really want to discuss this? Also, there is no question that there are two sides to this. But discussing the issues without taking into consideration the importantance of Israel's essential (but by no means complete) Westernness (at the very least in terms of freedoms and government and economy)compared with explicitly stated terrorist goals, upon which they have acted, is morally problematic. Why would we want to be an "honest" broker between a terrorist organization and a Democracy (arguably an imperfect one)?
There was a time when I thought that the US and European involvement has something to do with the fact that Israel was the only free democracy in the region - bundled with some post-WWII emotions.
These days I strongly believe that the whole US involvement in the region has something to do with this.
What is the "why" for Israeli exceptionalism? I have progressed over the last decade from pro-Israel to ambivalent and finally, as I educate myself more, decidedly pro-Palestinian.
And yes, I know the "anti-semite" bullets will fly fast and hard because of what I just wrote. And the "how can you be pro-terrorist?" daggers will cut at my throat. But in the educated mind how can middle-east culpability be anything but a wash?
But because of the power differential (which is truly vast) I have to fall on the side of the Palestinian. The true character of a powerful country is most aptly measured by how it uses that power, and in this regard Israel has failed miserably. As a sovereign nation, they consistently use their sledgehammer to pound thumbtacks, and have for the last 15+ years.
As Americans, we should observe Israel's obstinate and unenviable position with fear; our recent departure from decency to "protect the homeland" bears a horrifying similarity to Israel's near-indiscriminate bombing campaign and previous illegal actions in Gaza and the West Bank. The only thing apparent in the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict is how in the end they will most likely destroy each other.
Personally, I would rather the US didn't follow along that path of spiteful self-destruction.
As long as we're (rightly IMO) blaming everybody, my favorite target is the Palestinians' Muslim brothers who had the money and will to send armies and weapons against Israel but can't be bothered to help the Palestinians start up a viable economy.
dragnet:
The proper analogy is not North Korea firing at San Francisco.
It is more like one faction of a multi-factional Native American tribe firing rockets at Oklahoma City, if they had built up and lived in Oklahoma City for generations-- until they were forcibly removed to the neighboring reservation 60 years ago by the current Oklahoma City dwellers, and then forced to live in a state with separate roads, separate identity cards, separately labeled vehicles, and almost no contiguous territory between major population centers within their reservation, with checkpoints manned by armed Oklahoma City dwellers severely hindering commerce, education, healthcare, and most aspects of human life.
This is not to say one side is right or wrong (or even more right or more wrong) than another. It's definitely not to get at justifications or root causes for either sides' actions (or even to claim that either side has a monolithic perspective on the situation, just as Americans are split on almost every aspect of foreign policy). The situation is complicated. But the analogy to a hostile sovereign state firing on an American city with no provocation is very misleading in this context.
Looking at the image from this story inspired in me an internal debate regarding where and how I lay blame for this whole fiasco.
Seeing this woman having to be forcibly dragged away by an Israeli soldier, I had nothing but contempt (edit: contempt may be too harsh a word...what's a good word for "wrong and stupid")for her and people like her . But why? Her actions are nothing along the lines of the thousands of Palestian extremists who have acted out over the years, or of Hamas or Hezbollah. Yet, I found myself looking at that picture and muttering "you are making this problem unsolvable."
I've come to a point where I don't expect Palestinians to do the right thing, or even be able to do the right thing anymore. Their own government is firing off rockets into Israel for one reason only: to get a bunch of Palestinians killed by Israeli retaliation so they can then bitch about it. I don't expect the Palestinians to properly lay the blame on Hamas, because they've never known any better. The Palestinians are like an abused orphan who goes from foster home to foster home, each more abusive than the next.
It's as if my son were to get in a fight with a kid who had been seriously abused, both emotionally and physically. If it were a one-time thing, I'd encourage him to stick up for himself. But if this was happening day in and day out, I'd hope that he'd learn to stop accepting the invitation to fight. And if that didn't solve the problem, then it would probably be a good time to get some outside influences involved.
Why would we want to be an "honest" broker between a terrorist organization and a Democracy (arguably an imperfect one)?
Posted by FreddyBak | December 29, 2008 2:24 PM
It's a good point to remind us that the "State" of Israel began as a terrorist organization, and continues to be a sponsor of murder, deportation, torture and land theft, whereas Hamas actually won a democratic election.
People seem to be taking TNC to task for suggesting that we stay out of this situation. I'm not sure I agree with him, but I don't know that this whole "we have to do something" angle makes much sense either. Before you can argue that we have to do something, you have to be ready to say what that something might be, and that something has to be something that might actually happen. And nobody seems ready to stake their reputation on what that next US move should be.
Peretz's hawkish outbursts have not done much good for Israel in the past, but this sentence was taken out of context by yourself and Matt.
"So at 11:30 on Saturday morning, according to both the Jerusalem Post and Ha'aretz, as well as the New York Times, 50 fighter jets and attack helicopters demolished some 40 to 50 sites in just about three minutes, maybe five. Message: do not fuck with the Jews."
Peretz wasn't actually himself saying don't fuck with Jews, but that a spectacular bombardment sent a loud and clear message to Hamas, namely, don't fuck with the Jews or 50 targets will be destroyed in 5 minutes.
Peretz is wrong to think that this latest round of bombings will be good for Israel, but that doesn't challenge his main point being that proportionality means nothing when your adversary seeks to annihilate you
"But more than that, I wonder why it's incumbent on us to broker at all. "
You can't be serious with statement right? Our country has had our hands all over this conflict since the creation of Israel. Like Colin Powell said about Iraq... Pottery Barn in full effect. "You break it, you bought it."
The sad fact is that we haven't had leadership strong enough to "man-up" and take a tough but balanced approach with both sides. It's breaking my heart right now reading about all the senseless death. Unfortunately all were hearing from the Obama camp right now is that B.S. line about there's only one president at a time. Give me an F'ing break! You don't need a friggin' title to have an opinion about injustice. I fully believe in a country's right to protect itself but what's happen right now in Gaza is just an old fashioned slaughter.
Gazans elected Hamas to first oust Fatah, then provoke war with Israel. Hamas delivered on the first almost immediately, and now working with Hizbollah is delivering on the second.
Everything seems to be going as intended.
Chanting "rockets rockets rockets" misses the entire stated goal of Hamas - never truly negotiate, just posture. They're not freedom fighters - they are organized crime that terrorizes Palestinians while wrapped in the flag of nationalism.
amitav, you clearly are saying one is right and one is wrong..
there is a cause and effect at every turn, so to begin an argument on how things got here is unhelpful. but to justify lobbing rockets into civilian populations - excuse me, from civilian populations into civilian populations - by invoking illegal settlements or closed roads is silly. the israelis point out often that no other democracy on earth would be expected to suffer such barrages because it is true. hamas in this instance made a gamble and israel called its bluff. but all this nonsense about proportion is making my head hurt and adds nothing to the conversation.
The US supports Israel for the following reasons:
1. Israel has nuclear weapons (thanks to France).
2. If it looked like Israel was going to be destroyed, it seems highly plausible that the Israeli government would use those nukes. (As would the Americans /Chinese /British /French /Russians /Indians under such a threat, I'm not saying that the Israelis are inherently more bloodthirsty, they're just in a more threatening military situation.)
3. The American government does not want a nuclear war in the Middle East. So it has an incentive to make sure the Israeli government doesn't need to use those nukes. This explains the military support.
Unless one of these factors changes, the American government is going to keep on providing support to the Israeli government, clean hands or dirty. Anyone wanting to change this is probably best advised to make the argument that a nuclear war in the Middle East wouldn't harm American interests.
The Gazans live in an open air prison and they have been deprived of food, medicine, water, electricity, and all of what we consider the basic necessities of life. The median age is 17. The children are malnourished. There is no real economy, no jobs, and no hope for any kind of future. The world has turned their back on them.
They are not sitting in cafes sipping tea and having philosophical discussions like we are.
What we see over and over in these situations without learning anything is that this kind of oppression and collective punishment strengthens those who come forward and say they will defend the people and, yes, lay down their lives.
That is what Hamas did (and does) and that is why Hamas is strengthened by acts of aggression and violence against the population.
People living as Gazans live are not concerned about whether their leaders are fundamentalist or secular, jihadists or aliens from another planet. They are concerned about how they are going to get enough food and water to survive and feed their children. And that, quite frankly, appears to be a losing battle in itself for the majority of them.
In the context of history, the Palestinians have suffered the most in this 60+ year conflict and they have the least to show for it. They are losing land and water as I write this.
The propaganda that surrounds this conflict would have us believe that it is essentially about people hating each other. And we are supposed to conclude that one side is righteous and good and the other side is evil.
But the simple fact is that this is a resource war and it is the worst kind of resource war because it is the land and the water that is at stake.
Sadly, the war has evolved into a humanitarian crisis for the Palestinians and I do not believe that the answer to the problem is to bomb what is left of that miserable little slice of land into the dust.
Does anyone out there really think that the people will turn on Hamas and say, "You caused this, you assholes. Now get the hell out of here and let us start working with the Israelis to find a solution to our problems."
No, everyone knows THAT won't happen.
So, what is the endgame?
"The median age is 17."
A place with a high birthrate is likely to have a low median age. This doesn't say anything about quality of life. For example, the ultra right-wing Jewish community of Kiryas Joel in peaceful New York has a median age of 15.
The life expectancy in the Gaza Strip is 73.16 years for both sexes combined. Compare with neighboring countries and you will find it to be in line:
Egypt: 71.85
Jordan: 78.71
Lebanon: 73.41
Syria: 70.9
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html
NYT: ‘No End in Sight in Gaza Battle’
Battle?
Lurker,
Stating that the median age in Gaza in 17 is a misuse of numbers?
Forgive me for stating the obvious but it says that half the population of Gaza consists of children. That really should mean something to those who are trying to understand and perhaps even form an opinion about the politics of the current crisis.
Liza,
In the context of your first paragraph, it seemed that the median age of 17 was being used as evidence of poor quality of life or early mortality. You later say that it appears the "majority" of Gazans are in a "losing battle" to "feed their children" and "survive," which implies lots of children (a majority) are either dying or on the verge of dying of starvation.
Based on your latest comment, it sounds like you meant to emphasize the disproportionate number of children to show that the Gazan civilian population deserves extra sympathy, better treatment, more careful protection, or something along such lines, than one consisting mainly of adults. Or that it is less responsible for its actions than one consisting mainly of adults? If either or both of those, then the number is reasonably used and you have my apologies for misunderstanding.
Your analogy is definitely better and more thoughtful than mine. I don't mean to imply that Hamas is firing rockets without provocation. The root of the problem, in my opinion, is the ever-expanding Israeli settlements in the West Bank. These rockets remain the only leverage the Palestinians have in getting Israel to dislodge the settlers from land that must be part of a future Palestinian state. 'If Israel is able to successfully end all rocket fire, what impetus would the Israeli gov't have to press forward with the removal of the settlements?' is a line of thought that I am extremely sympathetic to.
But I still have some difficulty feeling substantial outrage over the actions that Israel has taken. Geopolitics and strategy aside, rockets raining down on schools in Sderot is as unacceptable as the horrendous treatment of Gazans. I find it hard to believe that any sovereign gov't would behave any differently than Israel.
You are right---this situation is complicated.
WE FUCKET IRAQ UP PALESTIAN UP AND THE WORLD UP AND NOW GOD WILL FUCK AS UP AGIAN FOR OUR SINS LIKE HE FUCKET OUR FOUR FATHERS UP ,THY SHALL NOT KILL, WE DID AND WE DO THATS WHAY GOD CRUST US AND TRUNED US AWAY AS HIS PEOPLE FOR BREAK THE CODE OF TEN COMMANDMENTS