Israel Celebrates Obama's Election While Olmert Calls For Return To '67 Lines
I fear that I might have bought into the story that Israelis favored the other guy
It turns out that the Israelis who preferred McCain were Americans who emigrated to Israel. They speak decent English so they get interviewed a lot.
But they are as representative of Israel as Israelis in Los Angeles are of America. The newspaper headlines depicted here are from Israel's largest circulation newspapers last Wednesday. I love the headlines "Obama: The Hope, "He Has a Dream." Etc.
And this fron Ha'aretz.
I guess it shouldn't be surprising that Israelis are actually happy about Obama. He should return the favor and push hard for a Palestinian state, in West Bank and Gaza, with its capital in East Jerusalem. That would be about the most pro-Israel thing he could do.
Meanwhile, outgoing PM Olmert is calling on Israel to return to the pre-67 borders.
There isn't much Olmert can do to effect the withdrawal but, simply by saying it, he sets a new marker. This is good news and heralds the inevitable end of the occupation.
Rosenberg, the same guy who said "I no longer trust Paul Krugman" during the primaries, makes a sweeping statement about Israel based on its newspapers. In other words, the media=a whole nation.
November 11, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't trust Krugman anymore. So what.
November 11, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ: It's getting harder and harder for the haters and rejectionists. Peace is coming. Let it reign!
November 11, 2008 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is famous for being a reconciler
so I fully expect he will have the
Isreal/Palestinian issue on the way to
solution very early.
November 11, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
They'll probably find great joy if Lieberman maintains leadership of the Homeland Security Committee, too.
November 11, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please support Russ Feingold for Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations (replacing Biden)
November 12, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, most Israelis want him off the chairmanship.
November 11, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
MK,
as head of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs has Lieberman held any investigative or oversight hearings? On anything?
November 12, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um,
make that MJ.
November 12, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The best thing to do is to reorganize "HOMELAND" SECURITY so that the Nazi inspired name disappears. FEMA needs to be out on it's own.
November 12, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, most Israelis want him off the chairmanship.
How do you know this? But importantly, how does AIPAC (and the Likud lobby) feel about Joe Lieberman losing any authority in the Senate?
And btw, how is it that when discussing what to do with Joe Lieberman no one mentions his strong ties to AIPAC and the Likud lobbying machine?
I contend that it is this connection that keeps Lieberman safe from any real consequences of his dastardly actions over the last few years.
Is it possible that another Independent Senator (who was not strongly backed by an important lobbying group) would be allowed to keep his authority after behaving in such a way? And while chairmanship of Homeland might not be important to the pro-Israel lobby, I doubt that the lobby want to see their strongest friend knocked down at all when it comes to any power he has in the Senate.
Is the issue the pink elephant in the room and just to obvious for anyone to mention?
November 11, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I contend that it is this connection that keeps Lieberman safe from any real consequences of his dastardly actions over the last few years.
I don't think so, Syd B. Obama threw a gigantic bone in the AIPAC direction with the Emanuel pick, so I think the Dems have earned a gimme on the Lieberman demotion. Surely Israelis understand as well as anyone else the necessity of punishing traitors for the sake of party discipline. If the Democrats don't demote Lieberman, a lot of Israelis will lose all respect for the Democrats. How could they ever trust a Democratic party and administration to enforce the terms of a difficult political settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict if we can't even establish minimal discipline in our own party in response to the rankest and most brazen acts of betrayal?
November 11, 2008 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was joking. Why would they care?
November 11, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you think Lieberman's connection to AIPAC and the pro-Likud lobby have anything to do with keeping him safe from consequences?
Come on...you follow these issues, right? What is your opinion?
November 11, 2008 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because Israelis, like many other people in the world, constantly look to the US president and the leadership of the US government for signs of strength and signs of weakness. Failing to punish Lieberman for brazen and egregious acts of betrayal would be a clear sign of weakness.
Suppose at some point in the future Barack Obama and the US congressional leadership get behind some bold Middle East peace deal. Suppose supporting this deal would require a substantial amount of political risk from key Israeli politicians, or from key Palestinian politicians. Suppose the US leadership says to these nervous politicians, "Get behind this. We will see it through, and we will have your back when the going gets tough."
I can imagine such politicians saying, "I simply can't trust you. I remember that a guy who was once in your own party (i) abandoned your party, and ran against and defeated your party's Senate candidate, (ii) opposed your presidential candidate and campaigned against him, (iii) appeared and spoke at your opponents' convention, (iv) suggested your presidential candidate might be a Marxist, (v) suggested your opponent might be a secret Muslim, lying about his religion. And I remember that you rewarded this fellow with a committee chairmanship! How can I trust you to defend me when my opponents stick a bayonet in my back when you won't even defend yourselves when someone sticks a bayonet in your back? How can I trust you to maintain the discipline among a very risky peace settlement coalition in the face of withering attacks when you can't even maintain minimal discipline in your own party?
This whole situation is nuts. I don't recall anybody arguing that we give Zell Miller some plum. And what Lieberman has done is worse! Why is there even a discussion about Lieberman?
For the sake of the success Obama administration, Lieberman has to be demoted from his chairmanship. If he is not, the failure to do so will send a very powerful signal of Democratic weakness, and will threaten the Obama agenda.
November 11, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Although it is difficult to know how one event on its own might color perceptions of the Obama administration, I have the same concern about ignoring Lieberman's behavior.
November 12, 2008 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did anybody do an actual pre-election poll of Israeli opinion on this issue? And I don't some silly call-in poll, where respondents self-select, but a real scientific opinion poll.
November 11, 2008 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still like the transfer of Jerusalem to int'l authority. An Arab-controlled East Jerusalem will look like Hamas-controlled Gaza -- unless you have a third party (ie int'l force) on the ground to enforce a settlement. Both sides would have to give up sovereignty in Jeruslam. Given it's huge historical significance, it certainly belongs to the whole world.
November 11, 2008 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know that it needs to be "international", but I agree that it shouldn't be an "Israeli" or "Palestinian" city. As I understand it, Jerusalem is run by a council-- make that council elected, half Israeli, half Palestinian.
I don't care if both countries call it their capital, or if neither claim it as a capital-- But we can't have one side but not the other claiming it.
A mutual defense treaty to protect the city between Israel and the (eventual) Palestinian state would also be a requirement, I'd think.
November 11, 2008 11:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is the right approach
November 12, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Brook Dataski-
Berlin was run by an "international authority" after World War II. How did that work out?
The Arabs don't want peace with Israel (they say so all the time, why doesn't anybody listen to what they say IN ARABIC TO THEIR OWN PEOPLE?) so any divided authority (Israeli/Palestinian or "international") would inevitably degenerate to chaos. There is only ONE solution for Jerusalem....UNITED UNDER ISRAELI RULE. The Arabs know this and support it. They do not want to live under Palestinian Authority rule. This does NOT mean they love Israel, not at all, but they know this is the best deal they are going to get.
MJ's claim that "Israelis love Obama" is NONSENSE, they did not support him before the election. Newspaper headlines mean nothing, since all three major daily newspapers are Leftist.
Most Israelis are center/right, most Israelis do not believe peace with the Arabs is achievable under current circumstance, most Israelis do not believe appeasement of Arab/Muslim radicals is in the best interest of Israel and the West, most Israelis oppose the division of Jerusalem, so if Obama is perceived as someone who is going to impose a peace agreement against Israel's wishes and to believe Iran can be talked out of building an A-bomb, and to advocate the division/destruction of Jerusalem, they are not going to support him (All the statements I made above are reflected in reliable polls such as those by the Steimetz Peace Center which publicizes them in Ha'aretz).
I wonder why MJ feels it is so important to spread dubious information that "Israelis support Obama" when it is Americans who made the choice.
November 12, 2008 12:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Berlin analogy isn't valid here. Berlin was divided -- by the very parties at odds with each other. There was no impartial military force available to occupy the city at the time. Jerusalem would be quite different if you had a force made up of Chinese/Russians/Africans etc... The key is that no terrorism or subterfuge would be tolerated and would be met with brute force. The int'l community has never shown the stomach to take on these kinds of thorny and implacable problems with the resolve required to see it through. Only the US has done that in the past, which is why we still have to pay for troops in South Korea.
November 13, 2008 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
To the Settler,
It's like this. Everything the right says about Israel hurts it. The Israeli and Jewish right's arguments for Israel sound to most Americans like the defense of apartheid South Africa. Racist, paranoid, ethnicicity uber alles, fanatical and profoundly UGLY. AND "WE CONTROL YOUR POLICY."
But there is another Israel -- secular or mainstream religious, anti-settler, heavily Tel Aviv based, socialist in orientation, anti-black hats, anti-occupation -- that TPM people need to hear about.
YBD, AIPACman and a few others operate as a "hate Israel" machine. TPMers read these guys and say YUK, I can't stand that place. Then I write and they think, oh, not everything in Israel is bad, ugly, and mean. The people MJ writes about aren't.
November 12, 2008 7:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's also useful to read Bitterlemons.
November 12, 2008 7:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
The main obstacle to Democracy in Israel is the fact that the religious parties ,for the last 60 years starting with Ben-Gurion,were given an incomparable power in Civil Law and Education.They succeeded to create generation after generation of Jews who believes that Israel must be primarily a Jewish State(including all the UNDEMOCRATIC advantages to whoever is a "REAL, PURE" Jew) Taking the power from the religious parties, by separating the Religion from the State, is the ONLY first step to change the direction of ISRAEL.
November 12, 2008 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
My sentiments exactly. Seems to me most Americans think all Israelis are hard-right. So why is Tzipi Livni outpolling Bibi Netanyahu? And why is Gideon Levy one of Israel's most popular journalists?
Americans complain endlessly that the U.S. is misunderstood by other countries, and that's why "they hate us". Of course the U.S. is misunderstood - that's the whole point. So is Israel. If not for the US and UK vetoes on the Security Council, probably the only item on the UN's agenda would be Israel.
Another common misconception among Americans about Israel is that its people are ultra-religious. In fact, Israel is secular, to the extent that most Israelis describe themselves thus (and as many as a fifth of Israeli Jews are self-described atheists).
November 12, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ says:
------------------------------------------------
But there is another Israel -- secular or mainstream religious, anti-settler, heavily Tel Aviv based, socialist in orientation, anti-black hats, anti-occupation -- that TPM people need to hear about.
-----------------------------------------------
Again, MJ states things that simply are incorrect. "Socialist in orientation"? Your fellow TPM blogger Bernard Avishai would find that amusing. Socialism is dead in Israel. Why did you state that, because the "progressives" you are trying to find favor with like the word?
You are correct that there is definitely a group in Israel that fits your description. BUT IT IS A MINORITY. The problem you and Bernard Avishai have is in trying to find a way to thwart their political power, which is based on the democratic voice of the people. Thus, you come up with the dream that somehow Obama, or some other outside element, is going to force Israel to do what you want, which most Israelis view as suicidal. Obama himself, in an interview with David Horowitz of the Jerusalem Post during his visit to Israel a couple of months ago, that he CAN NOT impose a solution. The problem is that "it takes two to tango". Just as it is not possible to impose a solution on Israel, it is not possible to impose a solution on the Palestinians. They have stated their demands very clearly and they are non-negotiable....return to the pre-1967 lines and recognition of the so-called "Palestinian Right of Return". NO ISRAELI GOV'T CAN ACCEPT THOSE TERMS AND THE ARABS WILL NOT SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITHOUT THEM. Most of the Israelis in the "progressive" group you described above understand that it is not possible to reach a peace agreement. The Left has also dropped the idea of unilateral withdrawals, seeing as the withdrawal from Gaza simply strengthened the most radical groups and led to an explosion of violence in the area. That is why most Israeli oppose DIVIDING Jerusalem (not your Orwellian-term "sharing"-because they know it will destroy the city).
Of course, the United States does not have to support Israeli policy. That is why I, as an Israeli, advocate ending US economic aid to Israel....it is unneeded and actually damages the Israeli economy. It is given for political reasons. Thus, we both will be more independent.
This is the reality. It will not change as long as radical Islamic movements are in the ascendency, as they are now. This does not mean the situation is hopeless, far from it. Once Israel STOPS making territorial concessions and the Arabs realize that they need to improve the lives of their people rather than making empty promises of total victory over Israel (AS HAMAS EXPLICITLY PROMISES AND FATAH IN A LESS EXPLICIT FORM), then the security situation will improve, the security wall can be torn down, the roadblocks removed and everybody can live a more normal life, both Palestinians and Israelis. But this is going to take time and a change in the Left's perception of what is really going on.
November 12, 2008 7:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
How can I trust you to defend me when my opponents stick a bayonet in my back when you won't even defend yourselves when someone sticks a bayonet in your back? How can I trust sexy lingerieyou to maintain the discipline among a very risky peace settlement coalition in the face of withering attacks when you can't even maintain minimal discipline in your own party?
November 12, 2008 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Enjoy the occupation, YBD. While you can.
November 12, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
"I guess it shouldn't be surprising that Israelis are actually happy about Obama. He should return the favor and push hard for a Palestinian state, in West Bank and Gaza, with its capital in East Jerusalem. That would be about the most pro-Israel thing he could do."
Come on, Rosy. You know that the most pro-Israel thing Obama could do is negotiate with those explicitly committed to exterminating Jews:
According to Yousef in the Al-Hayat interview, the Obama-Hamas talks were already ongoing during the U.S. election campaign: “We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the Internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to reveal this information as it may influence the elections or become manipulated by McCain’s campaign.”
Yousef also claimed he personally had friendly relations with some of Obama’s advisers and that “Haniyeh will draft a congratulatory letter to Obama for his victory.”
YBD, Rosy will never acknowledge that his Palestinian soul mates intend to slaughter every Israeli Jew. He passionately supports their goal, but will not cop to it. Yet like those few Jews who served as guards in concentration camps, Rosenberg's loyalties are as obvious as they are despicable.
November 12, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bob Lane has a problem with my loyalties. Now that's funny. My loyalties are to the country of my birth, my parents, my kids, etc.
And yours, Bob?
Have you ever posted here about any subject unrelated to the country of your loyalties. Is America anything to you but Israel's arsenal because, while I'm passionate about my country and a million other things, your passion extends just to one.
I don't know how old you are but I'd bet you are young enough to live where your heart is. I already do.
November 12, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ: Everytime you respond to "Bob Lane," you lose 10 seconds of your life and some brain sells. Anyone who talks about Palestinians wanting to "exterminate" Jews clearly is spendng too much time with his Settler friends stoning Palestinian olive pickers.
November 12, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone who talks about the Palestinians wanting to exterminate Jews is reading the Fatah and Hamas charters.
November 12, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bob Lane has a problem with my loyalties. Now that's funny. My loyalties are to the country of my birth, my parents, my kids, etc.
And yours, Bob?
Have you ever posted here about any subject unrelated to the country of your loyalties. Is America anything to you but Israel's arsenal because, while I'm passionate about my country and a million other things, your passion extends just to one.
I don't know how old you are but I'd bet you are young enough to live where your heart is. I already do.
November 12, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
mJ,
you certainly have a talent for attracting the mosquitoes.
November 12, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
He also possesses a talent for attracting support from sycophantic vermin.
November 12, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The Israeli and Jewish right's arguments for Israel sound to most Americans like the defense of apartheid South Africa."
Poor Rosy is divorced from reality:
Gallup Poll. Sep 11-14, 2008. N=1,007 adults nationwide. MoE � 3: "In the Middle East situation, are your sympathies more with the Israelis or more with the Palestinians?"
Israelis 59% Palestinians 17%
I will help you, Herr Rosenberg (as opposed to Hair Rosenberg, which judging from your photo obviously does not apply).
Betty Ford Center Admittance Dept: 800/434-7365
.
November 12, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
There MJ goes again: "most Americans". Bob, thanks for bringing the poll results. As I said in an earlier comment, when MJ says "most of the world likes Obama", or "most Americans don't like Israel" or "most Israelis want Obama", he means "most of the people who think like me", which, of course, is a minority, but for him, like so many "progressives", the majority of mankind are an ignorant rabble, a riffraff, so their opinions don't count.
November 12, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Considering that the media parrots the press releases of the IDF, it's surprising that the Palestinians got 17%. I rejoice for that.
Now Bob, the next time you throw a stone at a poor Palestinian trying to pick olives, try to chose a small one. They leave marks, you know.
And remember to hide behind the IDF soldier after you toss it. Six-year-old Palestinian girls can be frightening.
November 12, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Poor mythbuster. Aren't the freedom fighters blowing up enough Jews in pizzerias to satisfy your blood lust? When the Palestinians danced in the streets celebrating the slaughter of Jewish seminary students, were you clad in the appropriate attire...kaffiyeh, swastika, and tutu?
November 12, 2008 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are right. The American public cares deeply and strongly about the Israel's right to the occupied territories.
If an American President told Israel: we'll put you in NATO and protect you with a mutual defense treaty, in exchange, you have 24 hours to go back to the '67 lines and out of East Jerusalem, the American people would rush to the streets to protest. I mean, every Orthodox day school would be empty.
Actually, even without the NATO part, just a security agreement with the Pals, nobody would stand in a President's way.
Will it happen? Hopefully it won't be necessary. Even Bibi is coming around. BVye bye, West Bank.
November 12, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
[Given] just a security agreement with the Pals, nobody would stand in a President's way. Will it happen? Hopefully it won't be necessary. Even Bibi is coming around. Bye bye, West Bank.
Oh dear. Mr. Rosenburg is a dozen times sounder on right and wrong, but if one just worries about what is likely to happen, Mlle. YBD and her Hyperzionistical neocomrades cannot be disregarded with confidence.
Is M. von Netanyahu indeed comin’ ’round, then?
In Ha’aretz of yesterday there was this:
[I]t is critical for Israeli voters to know now, as part of the information with which they calculate how to vote, whether the candidates for prime minister are on a course for collision or discussion with Obama. The traffic reports say Livni is driving alongside Obama, and Netanyahu is approaching him head-on. Israelis do not like leaders who look weak or submissive, especially toward the Arabs. But they like even less leaders who invite a blowup with the U.S. and a steamroller of pressures, economic, diplomatic and military.
Hopefully or otherwise, might not "pressures, economic, diplomatic and military" be necessary? And being in fact necessary, might they not be seen in advance to be necessary by BHO and his merry men -- and therefore not embarked upon?
Maybe 2009 really is a fine moment for Peace Now, but Mr. Rosenburg does not explain why (that I can detect).
Happy days.
November 12, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
But if you were honest you would admit that your true goal is bye bye Tel Aviv. And bye bye Haifa. During the first wars of annihilation launched by your side, Rosenberg, Israel did not have the West Bank. Why were you jihadists attacking the Jews then, Rosy?
November 12, 2008 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have mixed feelings about Olmert's statement about return to pre-67 borders. It's the first time a major figure has said this, that I recall. But once again, we have a figure who is going saying the "right things," but he doesn't have to do anything at all about and at no cost to him. Peres, on the other hand, has been pretty consistent and has paid the price.
The more I think about it, the more I think Olmert's statement is disingenuous, as much as I would like to believe otherwise.
November 12, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
"My loyalties are to the country of my birth..."
Your loyalty is to your fellow America-hating degenerates:
Reuters
November 12, 2006
In a credible communique posted this morning along with other mujahideen press releases, the Palestinian Fatah faction and its affiliate the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade have signed a joint statement with other Palestinian militants threatening to launch terrorist attacks on America in response to the mistaken killing of 20 Palestinians in Beit Hanoun earlier this week by the Israeli army. According to the statement, "America's support for the [Israeli] aggression prompted us to seriously consider it as a legitimate target for us... The American people are responsible for the consequences of their continued support for Israel." Referring to Americans as "Cowboys", the statement went on to denounce "powerful and merciless American strikes on Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan" and the "fraud" of the United Nations Security Council "which protects and safeguards the security of the Zionists at the expense of the blood of the Palestinians." Finally, the joint statement concluded: "Enough is enough... the Americans only understand the language of blood and broken bones."
This latest statement comes on the heels of a similar threat from the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement HAMAS earlier this week.
November 12, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to downgrade your comment to "underperform."
Lost in the irony of citing the bat-squeaking of these weak and powerless groups is this unintended irony from the Reuter's article, to wit, the reference to "the mistaken killing of 20 Palestinians in Beit Hanoun earlier this week by the Israeli army."
Memo to Bob: the only people "exterminating" people right now in this struggle are the Zionists. Note that all the people killed this week have been Palestinian. By the IDF.
Now, you might want to put down your copy of "The Portable Kahane: The Wit and Truth-itude of the Zionist David Duke", fold up your Jabotinsky map of the Holy Land, and recheck your directions to the Shrine of Baruch Goldstein. You are going to survive.
And take a deep breath too.....I know you are upset that President-Elect Obama doesn't hate Arabs like you do. But don't worry, your friends on the Fundy Right do. And they will love you until Jesus returns...then you are on your own.
November 13, 2008 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Anybody who thinks Obama will be able to easily broker a peace agreement between Israelis and the Palestinians is drinking the Kool Aid. Israel doesn't have a government and while Livni is slightly ahead of Netyhanu in the polls, the smart money is that he will overtake her and win the election. On the Palestinian side, Abbas is still in a civil war with Hamas who won't recognize Israel. Obama needs to try to move forward but any peace agreement, at best, is years away.
November 12, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your comments do not conform to Rosenberg's inebriated scenario. You are therefore a crypto-Zionist racist traitor.
November 12, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why keep describing yourself?
November 13, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
RichardF.
re Bibi, I found the following from Arutz Sheva's "News Briefs" kind of amusing:
"Israeli Politicians Inspired by Obama?
(IsraelNN.com) Israeli politicians may be taking inspiration for their campaign strategies from United States President-Elect Barack Obama, analysts say. On Tuesday, activists supporting mayoral candidate Dov Tzur in the city of Rishon L'Tzion held signs saying, “Yes We Can,” a slogan associated with Obama.
Some analysts said Tuesday that Likud head Binyamin Netanyahu was using Obama's style as well. Netanyahu's new web page was created in the same colors and with the same basic design as Obama's pre-elections site was, and has similar content."
November 12, 2008 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink