Israel in a Post-American Era
In 1918, the United States proved militarily decisive in the defeat of the Kaiser's Germany and emerged as first power on earth.
World War II, ending in 1945, produced two truly victorious nations, the Soviet Union of Joseph Stalin and the America of Harry Truman.
Out of the Cold War that lasted from Truman to the disintegration of the Soviet Empire and breakup of the Soviet Union at the end of Ronald Reagan's term came a lone victor: the last superpower, the United States.
Who emerged triumphant from the post-Cold War era, 1991-2011?
Indisputably, it is China, whose 10-12 percent annual growth vaulted her past Italy, France, Britain, Germany and Japan to become the world's second largest economy and America's lone rival for first manufacturing power.
If we use a metric called "purchasing power parity," China overtakes America in 2016. Says the International Monetary Fund, the American era is over.
Strategically, too, the United States seems in retreat, nowhere more so than in that region that was the focus of George W. Bush's "global democratic revolution." And no nation reflects more the relative loss of U.S. power and influence than does Israel, whose isolation is today unprecedented.
A decade ago, Turkey, a NATO ally of 50 years, was a quiet friend and partner to Israel. Today, the Palestinians in Gaza view the Turks as among their staunchest friends in the Middle East.
President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt scrupulously adhered to the terms of his predecessor's peace treaty with Israel and maintained the western end of the Israeli blockade of Gaza.
Since he fell, the interim Egyptian regime has midwifed a unity government of Fatah and Hamas, moved to establish diplomatic relations with Tehran for the first time since the fall of the Shah and begun to lift the Gaza blockade. September's elections are almost guaranteed to deliver to parliament a huge if not controlling bloc from the Muslim Brotherhood.
While the Brotherhood appears to be the strongest party in Egypt, it has held back from openly seeking the presidency or absolute power in the legislature. It appears to be playing a waiting game. After them, us.
Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader who had looked to President Obama to bring a halt to new Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and preside over peace talks, appears to have given up on the Americans.
Though the beneficiary of hundreds of millions in U.S. aid, he has entered a coalition with his old enemy Hamas, and togetherif they can stay togetherthey plan to seek recognition of an independent Palestine by vote of the U.N. General Assembly in September.
The likelihood is that the overwhelming majority, including many of America's allies, will vote to recognize Palestine and seat it in the General Assembly, where it can make demands on Israel, backed by U.N. sanctions, to terminate its occupation and vacate its national territory.
The General Assembly resolution will set as the borders of Palestine those that existed between 1948 and 1967. But, today, beyond those borders live no fewer than 500,000 Israeli Jews.
While the United States vetoed a recent Security Council resolution condemning Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's continued expansion of settlements, we have no veto in the General Assembly. If Obama opposes the U.N. resolution, we and Israel will stand virtually alone.
Nor are these the only crises Israel confronts.
To Israel's north is Hezbollah, which has become the dominant force in Lebanon. To the south is Gaza, dominated by Hamas, which has never accepted Israel's existence. Israel has fought wars with both.
To the east is the West Bank, where the Palestinian Authority appears to have given up on U.S.-sponsored peace talks. Beyond lies Jordan, whose King Abdullah rules over millions of Palestinians, who is under pressure to take a tougher stand against Israel and who has no love for Bibi Netanyahu.
And what happened Sunday on the 63rd anniversary of Israel's independence and the Palestinian "nakba," or "catastrophe," where 700,000 fled or were driven into exile, is perhaps the most ominous portent of all.
Palestinian protesters approached the fence separating Lebanon and Israel and climbed the fence on the Israeli-occupied Golan heights to come and reclaim Palestinian lands. Fifteen to 20 were shot to death and scores were wounded by Israeli troops.
Though the White House backed Israel, across Europe what Israel did to these protesters seemed exactly what the king of Bahrain and the president of Yemen had done to theirs.
Given the coordination of the Palestinian actions, we may be on the verge either of a Facebook revolution or a "third intifada," an uprising by Palestinians in Israel, the occupied territories, and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, where hundreds of thousands of descendants of the original exiles still live.
Such an uprising would divert the attention of Arab peoples from the failures of their own regimes and isolate Israel and her principalindeed, onlyally, the United States, as they have never been before in the Arab world.
COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM
Entries(RSS)
As Richard Nixon pointed out when asked about the viability of the State of Israel. In the short term, he gave them a thumbs up. In the long term, he gave them a thumbs down.
In fact, Obama just called for a two-state solution. Netanyahu is predictably outraged.
Well they can thank their reckless supporters in America for stirring the hornets nest to such a degree that their staunchest ally is now faced with either going broke or going home. The only people now enjoying (or suffering) America's peace dividend from the cold war are Iraqis, our military industrial complex and think tanks who betrayed Israel by pretending they could see further into the future than billions of Islamists.
The level of severity of the current crisis can't really matter, right? Whether it is high or low? The birth rate of Palestinians vs. Israelis means that demographics will be destiny and everything else will be irrelevant.
I normally try to stay out of the core Israel debate, because I am always sure there is something more to it, and I don't know the whole picture. Recently, I found out that Mahmoud Abbas is actually the supporter of a cold blooded Druze murderer from Lebanon who killed several Israelis; he called him a freedom fighter. The media generally paints Abbas as a gentle reconciler. Now that I know that the media has been a tad bit selective in its portrayal of Abbas, I am even more glad I have not picked sides in this debate.
The Israeli government is very likely to do something VERY RASH before allowing its Jewish Sparta to go under.
I normally try to stay out of the core Israel debate, because I am always sure there is something more to it, and I don’t know the whole picture.
Wise choice. Personally, I have some sympathy for the Israelis as representing one of the last European colonial outposts holding off under siege--just a question of cultural affinity. But that cultural affinity, obviously, goes only so far: I do not share their ancestral religion and am more than a bit off-put by their cursory disregard for those within their borders/occupied lands who do as collateral damage in their face-offs against the intifadas.
I am an admirer of Binyamin of Netanyahu, however, and when I hear that extraordinary man speak, to me he seems to be the last of the Romans.
Too much hyperbole? I guess. But I wouldn't dare enter into a debate with that man. When British academics criticise any particular act or military operation of Israel, Netanyahu only reminds them of instances of Britain doing the exact same thing in the exact same conditions, except they offer reverence to such people then and now. Netanyahu is not just any kind of world leader - he is a LEARNED one.
For every one of his operations, he has given a convincing defense, and I don't think I had a real response to his justification of Gaza's brutal siege. He never said it explicitly, but he made it clearly understood in me that any country other than Israel could and would have done far worse to the Palestinians in Gaza.
Moreover, his serious "tough-talking eloquence" (to use Dr. Fleming's description) is matched by genuine patriotism for Israel. This man is not some career politician. He was a special forces commando, under the command of Ehud Barak, who helped rescue civilians during airline hostage crises. "Patriot" often seems to be an abstract notion, but he has been a patriot in the complete physical sense of the word, given the trials through which he has gone. Real patriotism, one rarely known. And even disregarding his special forces service, he is from a private sector background, and not an FDR/Obama type who has been in politics or activism for most of his life.
Interestingly, because he has been a soldier, he seems to have been far more inclined towards averting war and giving huge concessions to the enemy than civilian politicians have been. He knows what war is like. Among Israeli extremists, he is seen as a traitor for having given away so much land to the Palestinians. That man sacrificed political popularity in the name of doing something sensible to protect Israeli interests. Such honour is rare.
If the Arabs and Palestinians, by some very slim chance, manage to bury the Israelis in our lifetime, they should at least give Netanyahu a dignified treatment in either his execution, or his imprisonment, or his release. Among all the leaders who have walked the Holy Lands in the past, Netanyahu might be up there with Richard the Lionheart, King Baldwin, or Raymond de St. Gilles, three other men once well respected by Arabs.
Personally, I have some sympathy for the Israelis as representing one of the last European colonial outposts holding off under siege–just a question of cultural affinity.
Quite right: akin to our cultural affinity with one billion Indians who speak English, Caribbean negroes who live under the Union Jack and Filipinos who delight in Yank accents and Yank TV shows.
The Israeli government is very likely to do something VERY RASH before allowing its Jewish Sparta to go under.
Most probably. What makes matters worse is that their perpetual conduct since the establishment of "Israel" has been, by an unvarying scene of faithlessness and cruelty, to teach their enemies how they ought to be treated: which, you can be sure, in the sequel these enemies have learnt and will not forbear repeating this example with redoubled fury - justifiably so - on their heads.
Just so - His will be done.
If they were not blinded by their implacable enmity for humankind they would now have ascertained that their security must interest them in arriving at an accommodation with the Palestinians and that people's vast sea of friends. But the hour for such an accommodation has past - if it ever was timely.
Quite right: akin to our cultural affinity with one billion Indians who speak English, Caribbean negroes who live under the Union Jack and Filipinos who delight in Yank accents and Yank TV shows.
Two of those groups--Indians and Filipinos--are regularly flanked by Islamic attacks and I have a great deal of sympathy for them in those conflicts. In no way was I implying I would like to have a sort of open door immigration policy to everyone I mildly support in a little spate across the globe...
The comparison between Filipinos and Israelis is off.
The Israelis are largely de facto European immigrants. It's a country of Hungarian, Polish, German, Ukrainian, Russian, and Czech immigrants.
Filipinos merely borrowed from a foreign culture, while the Israelis belonged to it, and that too only a few decades ago.
NGPM has some reason to say he has Occidental sympathies with Israel.
It’s not accurate to represent Israel as a European enclave. My recollection is that about half its Jewish population is native to the region – largely immigrants from the surrounding Arab states who arrived between 1948-1952. These “Arab Jews” have traditionally had, and probably still have, a higher birthrate than the European Jews. The arrival of Russian Jews since 1991 has presumably tipped the balance back somewhat, but the non-European population is still very large.
Also, Israel’s firmest backer today is not the US but Canada, ignored by Pat. Indeed, the support for Israel shown by Stephen Harper’s Conservative government was probably the cause of Canada’s being denied a seat on the Security Council, which it had held before. Since the Conservatives just won their first majority government, this support is unlikely to waver, unless under US pressure.
"Israel’s firmest backer today is not the US but Canada, ignored by Pat."
Well then, if I were an Israeli I would be careful of Canada. David Frum is a Candian citizen and is no doubt peddling the same snake oil up north that he was peddling for the GOP down here. Hysteria while shouting "evil" is not a valid substitute for Statesmen.
The addiction to 30 billion dollars in American aid is the only restraint upon Israel. Their economy is booming like China and trade with Turkey is going well, despite the foreign policy differences. They have the top nuclear arsenal in the global south and they will not hesitate to use it, as Russia threatened in the Georgia conflict. Their lesson from the Holocaust was to be the strongest kid on the block. They are going nowhere.
The Muslim Brotherhood is running an independent candidate for President of Egypt from the doctor's union.
Response to those sympathetic to Israel (understandable due to one sided news in USA):
For many, Israel is known to be a criminal/fraudulent state founded on terror (and ignored UN resolution on conditions of its recognition) and the source of much/most of the evil in the world, a world leader in harboring criminals, laundering money, receiving funds from thefts, frauds and swindles, selling body parts, sex trafficking, stealing everything including from USA: military secrets, technology of all types, and on and on, and a platform for terror, murder, theft and oppression.
The evidence is overwhelming as to its lead role in engineering and orchestrating 9/11 with assistance from our neocons. That fact is key to America’s restoration. Who is beneficiary of WOT? What country has the neocons first loyalty? Who do they believe in telling lies to?
Fairly recent books (Kill Zone by Craig Roberts, Final Judgment by Michael Collins Piper, and Opium Lords by Salvador Astucia) point to international bankers, Israel and Israel, respectively, for JFK assassination. The best clues from earlier books like The Yankee and Cowboy War by Carl Oglesby indirectly do so also: a) how could someone infiltrate government, media, medicine, military in positions high and low to be a part of Presidential assassination, and b) how could Jack Ruby (ne Rubenstein) go on and on about concern for his “race” being tortured or expelled from the country when the truth came out [remember Ruby shot Oswald promptly and was conclusively identified as letting out one of the riflemen at stop sign by high quality witness, Julia Ann Mercer). Logical Answers: Zionists for their love of Israel---“sayanim,” and Jews.
Remember Israel’s attack on USS Liberty in 1967. Operation Cyanide by Peter Hounam and total circumstances infer plan by Israel and LBJ to nuke Egypt under false pretenses. [Ready planes on deck armed only with nuclear weapons in advance of incident---unheard of, and LBJ reported that he did not care if all sailors died as he was not going to embarrass an ally.] So many submarines were under or near USS Liberty and sent over months in advance, undoubtedly with “secret committee” approval/direction, but likely only those who identify with Israel, as Cyrus Vance was outraged and resigned after murderous attack on USS Liberty.
In 1996 our GAO identified Israel as having “most aggressive espionage operations” and was second during thirty year Cold war to Soviets. Despite being largest recipient of US aid, “Individuals within Am. Jewish community….work for interests of Israel and then pretend it helps USA. Individuals who literally buy with millions in cash US politicians…” [Andrew I. Killgore, former US Ambassador to Qatar, retired after 32 years of Foreign Service and President of Am. Education Trust, in 1985].
Undoubtedly, more murders and crimes and downed commercial airliners (and recent terrorism) per number of citizens have emanated from Israel than any other country (and leading suspect for London's 7/7/05 bombings and USS Cole), plus it has been a platform for fraud and oppression, including the destruction of USA.
Chilton Williamson has a great essay in the current issue of Chronicles entitled “Who Cares Who’s Number One?” He points to the era when the U.S. was “lacking great influence in world affairs and thus untroubled by importunate would-be allies, aspiring protectorates, and foreign clients.” What if Israel abandoned us and turned to China for patronage? That would be too bad for us.
Mr. Williamson also wrote the following observation that I thought was quite good.
"Intellectuals create historical syntheses, not active people-who, in so far as these syntheses amount to an accurate description of the world, simply act them out. That is not to say that certain of these people are unaware of what they are up to, where they are going, and where they intend to take the world, if they can. As a general rule, a society in contradiction of itself to the degree that ours is, and at the elevated social and political levels at which fundamental contradictions are recognizable, is not just a troubled society, it is a society in which trouble is being actively contemplated. And so is also a devious and deceitful society-one based on lies, in which lying has become its modus vivendi in its internal as well as in its external relations. Worst, it lies to itself about its own nature-what it is today, and what it has in mind to become tomorrow."
There is a country led by a man named, Bibi?
This is from an old Marx Brothers movie, right?
So who is this "King of Bahrain" then?