The Forward Explains
For those still following the Obama-Netanyhu match, The Jewish Daily Forward offers this calm assessment:
“More important, Obama was able to shape the public conversation by articulating a strategy both nuanced and bold, one that builds on the current success of economic sanctions and international pressure to further weaken and isolate Iran, while holding a military option over the heads of the Islamic regime like a deadly anvil. As commander-in-chief, he must balance the scant American appetite for a third war in a Muslim country with the imperative to keep not just Israel, not just the Middle East, but the world safe from a dangerous nation flirting with the apocalypse. He and Netanyahu don’t have to be best friends to understand each other.” Forward
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/03/living-nuclear-iran
Seems like the right approach
“….world safe from a dangerous nation flirting with the apocalypse.”
The dangerous nation is the one who has neocons constantly reemerging to foster war while sending none of theri own into battle.
My prayer for the foreseeable future will be for peace, especially in the Middle
East. I’m not able to make this a disinterested prayer, but I sure do hope that it’s in accord with “Thy will be done.”
The Paul Pilar article cited in the Jimmy Mac post above, and cited previously, is quite good.
Give it a try.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/marchapril_2012/features/we_can_live_with_a_nuclear_ira035772.php
Herr Mazzella hits many nails right on their heads.
The Forward piece is a kind of a FRIEDMAN, named after Tom Friedman–who regularly plays Good Cop-Bad Cop with himself.
He (and this Forward opinion) walks on both sides of the streets at the same time.
He and others play to the now (dead) liberal tradition of their parents and grandparents– while at the same time congratulating the congress which voted 90-10% for approving the Gaza massacre.
Even JStreet felt it necessary to endorse the slaughter.
We do have something of a paradox on our hands. The anti-Likud forces are in the USA getting stronger every day, but the War Party has not lost a beat.
And then we hear of the 1,000,000 (?) Israelis who have emigrated and the supposed alienation of the younger American Jews, but then we are witnessing the utter shamelessness of the Republican candidates who are selling us all out for million here and a million there.
At bottom, we will not be free, until we speak up–and show the bishops that silence is a way of burying. not celebrating our once free country.
The U.K.’s Guardian thinks Obama is doing pretty well in the circumstances:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/09/obama-netanyahu-israel-iran-talks
Thanks Ann. Among the Guardian’s points:
“But as the smoke cleared on this week’s noisy wrangling between the US and Israeli leaders over Tehran’s nuclear programme, the American president emerged with a precious commodity: time.
“Obama also established a position his critics may find hard to assail. He forced those many members of Congress and beyond who have conflated America’s interests with Israel’s on to the back foot by saying that on Iran there are differences – and he will serve US interests first.
“Aaron David Miller, who served six US secretaries of state as an advisor on Arab-Israeli negotiations, said that Obama deflected Netanyahu’s attempts to lay the trip wire for military action.”
And who among you is willing to consider diplomacy with Iran? The US has spent just 45 minutes in direct talks with Iran since 1979. This fact should give scandal to those who believe in the Just War Tradition, let alone those of us who recognize the growing power of nonviolence worldwide in the past century.
If you regularly read the posts on this topic, I think you’d find that at least half, and probably more commenters, are in favor of diplomacy. Take a look!
Thanks, Margaret. I’m a long time subscriber to the print edition and am only recently beginning to explore the online features. I stopped by when Cathleen Kaveny was on the Daily Show and started poking around…
As you will see, many of the commenters are also print subscribers. Welcome!
Ms. Setzler –
It’s because that Iranian Ayatollah said some kind things about Obama this week that I’m starting to see a glimmer of hope for diplomacy.
To me the big question is:; is Amatinedine (sp.?) really crazy the way Netanyahu says he is? I think he is more immature than anything, but for a crazy reason of my own. When he was here in the U. S. not long ago he seemed very, very interested in fitting in socially. His manner of dress was straight out of GQ. When talking to some students he talked their language — very cool, not stuffy head-of-state. He seems to cultivate an image of a man much younger than he actually is.
Somehow, I think Obama might play to that side of him, I suspect A. even has some inclination to lead aIran into the21st century. His insistence on nuclear power confirms that hypothesis. Now if only he would work on the poverty and narrow=mindedness of the Iranian theologians.
Then again I might be grasping at straws.
If you watched 60 Minutes tonite, the former head of Israeli Mossad was interviewed:
- he believes that the Iranian leadership is very “rational” in its own way (not western but rational)
- he believes that there is up to three years wiggle room in terms of allowing diplomacy, etc. to work
- he went on recording of supporting internal Iranian groups such as the opposition parties, students, etc. to foment internal pressure
- he would not confirm but also did not disavow the fact that for 10+ years efforts of assassinations, computer viruses; defective machinery, plant bombings, etc. happened to delay Iranian nuclear ambitions
- he painted a much more nuanced picture of what would happen to Israel if they made a hasty and early intervention in Iran – e.g. anticipates more than 50,000 rockets from Hamas and Hezbollah which would seriously injure and interrupt Israeli life for months
- he talked about Iranian economic and political goals to increase the price of oil which of course means that they want to keep the threat going and potential unrest via nuclear thrreats because western economies then keep or raise the price of oil based upon the instability
Bill–Learning what is “rational” in the thought of the Iranian leadership is a very encouraging beginning to diplomacy. Thanks for sharing the 60 Minutes segment.
Ann–You have an interesting take that seems to come from being present to what you see of the man himself, rather than the media-packaged conceptions. A bit of hope in that, if others can do the same.
Josie ==
I guess my appreciation of the importance of leaders was formed by WW II. Roosevelt, Churchill, Hitler, Mussolini were all remarkable leaders. Very different from each other, but each succeeded in reaching their goals at least for an extended period of time by uniting disparate elements in their own countries. Yes, Hitler and Mussolini lead political movements,but unless there are leaders who can unify disparate elements movements alone solve little.
The U. S. has the misfortune today to have an opposition party whose leaders have only one ambition — to unseat the leader of its opponent. Power-grabbing at its impurest. Republican primaries only serve to illustrate that the GOP’s main problem is scarcity of credible leaders. There is even a buffoon of a radio commentator who claims to be the chief leader of the Republican Party. His influence is indeed strong — but only because the rest of the GOP leadership is so weak. They need a knight in shining armor.