The manufactured outrage of the Israeli far right


By Joe Millis
May 20, 2011
Share

The cowardly Israeli far right and its friends abroad would have people believe that President Barack Obama has "thrown Israel under a bus" (a neat way of describing giving $3 billion+ in aid and unlimited diplomatic and political support every year) with his historic and thoughtful speech on the Middle East and North Africa. These hopeless and hate-filled self-delusionists would have people believe that Obama called for an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines. For people who believe black is white and white is black this sits very nicely with their fears and hatred.
But did Obama say any such thing?.
Maybe the people who would have you believe this canard were merely going on a very initial, very wrong AP report.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is endorsing the Palestinians’ demand for their future state to be based on the borders that existed before the 1967 Middle East war, in a move that will likely infuriate Israel. Israel says the borders of a Palestinian state have to be determined through negotiations.

In a speech outlining U.S. policy in the Middle East and North Africa, Obama on Thursday sided with the Palestinians’ opening position a day ahead of a visit to Washington by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu is vehemently opposed to referring to the 1967 borders.

Until Thursday, the U.S. position had been that the Palestinian goal of a state based on the 1967 borders, with agreed land swaps, should be reconciled with Israel’s desire for a secure Jewish state through negotiations.

Let's give them the benefit of the doubt (it is, after all, the Jewish thing to do) and say that they were too quick off the mark and too quick to condemn because they were not in possession of the full facts. It's a big assumption, I know, but perhaps they were too busy to watch the actual speech live on TV and the web. Perhaps they were too busy blogging their views to miss the point.
So what did Obama say?

The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.

I'll repeat it, so that they can inwardly digest the meaning.

The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.

That's right, lines not borders, based on 1967, secure and recognised borders with mutually agreed land swaps (to take in demographic shifts, JM). He also was very clear that any unilateral moves by the Palestinians and any attempt at delegitimisation of Israel would fail. That's anti-Israel? That's throwing Israel under a bus?
Surely, if Israel wants to continue to be a Jewish and democratic state that would be the clever thing to do. But perhaps the Israeli far right and its mouthpieces do not want a Jewish and democratic state. Actually, who knows what they want other than they don't want peace? They don't even want to consider what being a Jewish state means. They know that a mere discussion on that would tear them apart and set them on a damaging collision course with the majority of Israel's greatest asset, world Jewry.

Buy they are scared of peace and frightened of hope, and in that they are no different from any other far right group around the world.
And if they think that Obama will lose in 2012, perhaps they are more deluded than I believe since the Republicans are so divided over policy and character that Obama might just end up facing a Ron Paul/Sarah Palin "dream team". And wouldn't that be just deserts for the Israeli far right?
H/T Little Green Footballs (a proper blog site)

COMMENTS

Advis3r

Fri, 05/20/2011 - 11:27

Rate this:

0 points

Dummy did he say that those mutaully agreed lines would entail the refugees sitting on the Palestinian side? No he did not. So we will agree the borders and the Arabs will come back and say now we want the right of return. Obviously someone with little understanding of Middle East negotiation does not get it and you certainly do not.


Joe Millis

Fri, 05/20/2011 - 11:38

Rate this:

0 points

"Advis3r", again I advise you to try and keep up and to ditch the hopeless scaremongering.
Here's what Obama said on Jerusalem and the Refugees

These principles provide a foundation for negotiations. Palestinians should know the territorial outlines of their state; Israelis should know that their basic security concerns will be met. I’m aware that these steps alone will not resolve the conflict, because two wrenching and emotional issues will remain: the future of Jerusalem, and the fate of Palestinian refugees. But moving forward now on the basis of territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues in a way that is just and fair, and that respects the rights and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians.


Joe Millis

Fri, 05/20/2011 - 11:46

Rate this:

0 points

Look at this again. it appears to me that Obama is endorsing some kind of interim agreement. Isn't that the Israeli far right's wet dream?

I’m aware that these steps alone will not resolve the conflict, because two wrenching and emotional issues will remain: the future of Jerusalem, and the fate of Palestinian refugees. But moving forward now on the basis of territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues in a way that is just and fair, and that respects the rights and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians.

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

LATEST COMMENTS