51st: Let those people go!
Michael Desch, professor of political science at the University of Notre Dame wants the U.S. to abstain in the Security Council next week.
“Obama should threaten to abstain in this matter if the Netanyahu government continues to drag its feet in fully embracing the two-state solution, Israel’s only hope for remaining Jewish and democratic.
“Putting an end to the Israel-Palestine conflict would be good not only for the Palestinians and the Israelis; most importantly it will also advance U.S. interests. We tend to dismiss al Qaeda’s (and other radical states’) embrace of the Palestinian cause as cynical rhetoric. But there is no doubt that the continuing Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands anti-U.S. sentiments, hindering our war against terrorism. Also, as the Arab Spring gives the Arab Street a great voice, it is clear that this issue resonates broadly.”
HT: Stephen Walt:
Juan Cole gives a reasoned and sober account of PA President Abbas’s announcement to seek recognition from the UN Security Council.
“The big problem of the Palestinians is that, being stateless, they lack moxie. Even Americans can go tomorrow to the West Bank and steal Palestinian land and resources, aided by an enormous US aid package for Israel and by unthinking, knee-jerk approval by the US government of virtually anything Israel’s rightwing government does, no matter how illegal in international law.
“If Israeli squatters move in, claim Palestinian fields, and dig deep wells that cause the Palestinian’s wells to dry up, what recourse do Palestinians have? They mostly can’t sue in Israeli courts because those courts are premised on Zionist principles of appropriating Palestinian land and denying Palestinians statehood.”
Most Americans, including those who comment here at dotCommonweal, don’t seem to grasp how dangerous the situation is for the United States, for Israel, and obviously for the Palestinians. A U.S. veto in the Security Council makes us a pariah state along with Israel.
“The truth is that our Israeli masters fear and hate the Palestinians as tribal enemies and do not intend to ever deal fairly with them. All else is lies and mirrors.
“In humble service to the hegemon we will vote this week to destroy whatever hope there might be for American influence in the Islamic World. After that we should prepare for whatever new wars Israel may want us to fight for them.”
The State of Play: “RAMALLAH, West Bank — The Palestinian decision to apply for full United Nations membership at the Security Council, announced Friday by President Mahmoud Abbas, was the most viable of the only options possible: surrender, return to violence or appeal to the international community, a senior Palestinian official said Saturday.”
Everyone trumps the awareness of the Holocaust now. The awareness is a good thing. The problem has reversed so much now that too many are reluctant to criticize Israel strongly. We should make a rule now; One cannot celebrate the condemnation of the Holocaust without calling for fair treatment of the Palestinians. The Israelis have overstepped religious bounds just as many Muslims have. The Republican’s courting of the Jewish vote is further prostitution of principle to money and politics. It is the irony of ironies that the leaders of the Jewish people are now contributing more to world conflict than anyone else. Many Jewish people understand this. Are there no principled politicians left?
If Obama abstained, the next election might turn from a doubt to a rout. He’ll vote no.
Michael Desch isn’t running for office.
If Obama abstained, the Israelis would finally sit down with the Palestinians and negotiate the two-state solution that will be the only quasi-peaceful solution.
Ms. S. ==
Do you know if there are any geographical reasons, shall we call them, why the Israelis and Palestinians wouldn’t get along? I mean, are there any issues such as disputed water availability, arable land, desertification problems, etc. that would impel them towards staying one country or driving them apart? Or are their problems all historical, religious and political?
There is a scary piece by Carlo Strenger of Tel Aviv U. (and the Ha’aretz) in Friday’s NYT.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/opinion/netanyahus-partners-democracys-enemies.html?ref=opinion
I hope he’s wrong, but he sounds convincing.
Obama’s vote will decide how I vote or don’t vote in 2012 since there will be no viable alternative.
Thanks for the link, Nicholas. Missed it; had to skip my morning newspaper read yesterday and run off to the Fordham conference discussed above.
Strenger echos things I’ve read before; the recent demonstrations in Tel Aviv and the authentic Israel (i.e., within the 67 borders) seem to be about living conditions, especially housing. Since the govt subventions for housing go largely to the West Bank, you’d think that the demonstrators would make some connection between that and their protest. I didn’t detect that they were making the connection in what I’m reading (though I don’t read hebrew). That would seem to reenforce Strenger’s point that the liberal secularists are not going to question the West Bank Settlements. Alas.
Ann O: It’s been cumulative, I think. Most recently it’s West Bank land that the settler continue to take. Sometimes they destroy crops and trees. There have also been reports of well poisoning or water diversion from Palestinian wells.
Lately there have been attacks on mosques and as I posted last week: the president of Bethlehem University reports attacks on a professor and a student (so intimidation). And there are water issues…Israel/Palestine seems to have the climate of Arizona..Israelis love lawns, etc. There are aquifer issues, irrigation issues, and long-term use/planning issues that go unattended because at least some Israelis believe it all belongs to them.
Thanks, Ms. S. The problems are even worse than I had imagined. Sigh.
See Friedman in today’s NYT Sunday Review. The problem is Bibi.