-
Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Nietszche said it: spend too much time peering into the abyss, and it will suck you in.
The results of the Legislative Elections in Israel show a turn to the Right that began under Netanyahu has not shifted, even if the man himself is not as 'Right-wing' as previous holders of the Office of Prime Minister.
Not commented on in the press, in the UK at any rate, is the staggering decline of the Labour Party, reduced from the party that declared Israel's Independence in 1948, formed its Government without interruption to 1977, and is now little more than a secondary or even a fringe party of what Trump would call 'Radical Leftists', except that in this case he might be right. Labour was in 1948, and today is still a member of the Socialist International, as is the smaller party, Meretz, but that is as far as it goes. There is an analysis of how far Labour has fallen here-
Israel’s Labor Party Is Responsible for Its Own Failure - Opinion - Haaretz.com
Why, then, has the Fascist politics of Israel triumphed over its alternatives?
Part of the reason, and I think one of its main ones, is that Ariel Sharon, then Netanyahu, created narratives that were designed to rubbish the historical adherence Israel has- or had- to the Collectivist aspects of Zionism. One of the original ambitions of the 'Labour Zionists' in 1948 was to create a collective form of Agriculture as the foundation of the Israeli economy, whether the Moshav or the Kibbutz.
Since Menachem Begin's victory in 1977, collective agriculture has declined as Israel has in economic terms, replaced agriculture with technology as its greatest success, both domestically and internationally. On the one hand, this has reduced Israel's dependence on the US, though the billions of dollars of subsidy it gets from the American tax-payer dwarfs that paid out to other Governments.
On the other hand, the price paid for the Globalization of Israel's economic relations and the influx of foreign capital, has meant the levelling of prices, so that housing is now beyond the reach of most young families, given that most Israeli families do not want to live on the cheaper, but illegally occupied areas of the West Bank, where they have nothing in common with the fanatical Settler Movement that is in any case, a law unto itself, also known as 'Gun Law'.
Netanyahu has created a Narrative of Crisis, a Narrative of Tension in which the by now faded and jaded claim that Israel is surrounded by enemies that seek to destroy it is the daily bread. How this fits in with the 'Abraham Accords' which has normalized relations with those 'Enemies' I don't know. Moreover, the only truly hostile states, failed State Lebanon, and failed State Syria, are more likely to be the targets of Israel's war machine than vice versa, just as these days, given the implosion in Lebanon, Iran is the victim of Israel's military violence, rather than the other way round.
This leaves the usual suspects, the Palestinians, and Saudi Arabia.
Although there has been some speculation that Mohammed bin Salman would consider normalizing relations with Israel, he may not need to. Both are in a tacit alliance with their common enemy, Iran, and though MbS might do a deal with Israel, what would be the trade off for him? There is no sign he cares about the Palestinians, so I don't see a deal involving peace there. And anyway, in the long term, the aim has always been to unify the former Arab territories of the Ottoman Empire under Wahabi command, a long term ambition I believe MbS is committed to, rather in the way Xi wants China to 're-unify' Taiwan with the 'Mainland'.
What of the Palestinians, one of the most ineffective political 'Nations' in the world? Here lies the problem, for while Netanyahu can maintain the narrative of Existential Despair -either them or us, a narrative that is fundamental to the Religious maniacs he may have to bring into his new Coalition government- and while sporadic violence against Israelis by Palestinians has increased, it is part of the political cultural of despair that Netanyahu himself created when he rejected the 1993 Peace Treaty between the PLO and Israel, so that instead of improving relations, Israel and the Palestinians have been repeating the same old tit-for-tat violence the Peace Treaty was supposed to end.
And now throw in this example of Fascist brutality -the law which decrees foreigners must not only inform the Govt of Israel if they fall in love on the West Bank but leave " after 27 months for a cooling-off period of at least half a year.".
Controlling the territory is not enough, controlling human emotions is an extension of Fascist doctrine from 'nothing inside the State against the State' to reach into the hearts of the people. Sort of 'No feelings against the State inside the State' to paraphrase Gentile. The ghost of Avraham Stern, trained in Civitavecchia by Mussolini, at Stern's request, is laughing all the way to the Gulag.
Warning to all who fall in love on the West Bank-
Israeli rules say West Bank visitors must declare love interest - BBC News
The alternative, my peace plan, has yet to be considered. This would create an Israel-Palestine Confederation, in which every citizen would have equal rights -equal rights to the land, to housing, to health, education and work and political representation. The boundaries of Jerusalem would be re-drawn so that the City is taken out of poltiics to become an autonomous, global inter-faith hub in honour of its three dominant religions. The State buildings of Israel would thus no longer be in Jerusalem, but neither would the Palestinians be allowed to claim Jerusalem as anything but its 'spiritual capital'.
I don't see how the settlers on the West Bank can be expelled. They are armed and dangerous and shoot to kill. But if the Confederation works, the impetus for the Settler Movement, based as it is on bogus religious claims and violence and intimidation, might subside, though I think the weak point is the poor non-relations they have with West Bank Arabs.
So, a plan for peace, or Netanyahu's 'forever war'?
What is clear is that the current Narratives of Tension and Crisis cannot be allowed to shape policy, but I doubt Netanyahu has any intention of changing, just as I doubt he will join us in supporting Ukraine's war for freedom against Russia. The illegal siege of the Gaza District will continue, the illegal occupation of the West Bank continue to hold, and deteriorate with Netanyahu's blessing as he needs the tension there to justify his Fascist policies.
As was said by a Palestinian viewing the current situation-
"“This is no longer a slippery slope. This is the abyss itself.”"
Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu comeback brings despair for leftwing parties | Benjamin Netanyahu | The Guardian
Results of the Election here-
2022 Israeli legislative election - Wikipedia
Members of the Socialist International here-
Members - Socialist International
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Another legislative election has turned Israel even further to the Fascist right than it was before, with dire claims from the new members of Netanyahu's coalition of 'annexation' of Palestinian territories, illegal settlement building, and already a probably illegal raid on the finances of the Palestinian Authority that was set up as part of the Peace Treaty of 1993.
That new members of the Govt represent parties that acquired just over 10% of the vote (see Wikipedia link below) is now sadly typical of the mess Proportional Representation makes of Democratic politics, while the views of Smotrich and his allies on the Judiciary and LGBTQ+ issues are loathed by the majority of Israelis. All of which suggests, as it also now typical of Israeli politics, that Netanyahu's new Coalition might not survive internal disputes, but the man himself is most keen to find the means to end the legal problems he has, and to deepen his relationship with Vladimir Putin and the Brutal Dictatorships in the Middle East that are every bit as Brutal as the Military Dictatorship Israel has imposed on the Palestinian territories.
Even a sloppy Liberal coward like Simon Tisdall now wonders if Israel as far as Western Democracies are concerned, is 'on our side', though neither he, nor the British or American Governments will dare to criticize Israel and certainly not sanction the country for its ever rapid descent into the Fascist paradise dreamed of years ago by Avraham Stern and Menachem Begin.
Netanyahu is Israel’s own worst enemy. Why won’t western allies confront him? | Simon Tisdall | The Guardian
Here is the elephantine problem -if Israel were to Annex the West Bank, Russian style, what rights will the 2 million+ Palestinians have in what will be, de facto, a Single State? What rights will the 2 million+ Palestinians in the Gaza District have? Either they must all have absolutely equal rights with Israelis, or Israel must admit that Palestinians will be 'second class' citizens or 'non-citizens'.
The implications for this are clear: if it happens, Israel will no longer be a Democracy, but a Violent Dictatorship to match its partners in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia. I am sure Israel will continue its bombing raid in Syria with impunity, its assassinations in Iran, its illegal occupations and illegal settlement building all with impunity, because nobody dares to critizise or challenge Israel's power.
But as Tisdall concedes, what if this leads to am implosion inside Israel? Will secular citizens continue to accept the Religious nut jobs entering their Government because of a desperate Egomaniac, that dismantles the institutions and political culture they have nurtured since 1948?
Netanyahu has always believed in confrontation, not diplomacy. War, not peace. Violence, not negotiation. What if his reckless policies now lead him into a civil war, is it a war he thinks he can win?
2022 Israeli legislative election - Wikipedia
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
A trenchant article on the crisis in Israel, but Freedland doesn't take the view that I do. He may be right about the role Palestinians can play, but only in a political settlement where they are equal to Israelis, which is something Netanyahu cannot even imagine, and the Fascists in Israel can't accept.
The solution is a Confederation of Israel and Palestine, similar to Switzerland, in which every citizen has equal rights. Jerusalem being what it is for religion, it's boundaries to be re-drawn to exclude Israel's Govt buildings, and become an Inter-Faith Centre of the World.
Otherwise Israel will rule over a country in which 4 million Palestinians are nothing, and reject the authority of the State. It is as absurd as Russia annexing a Ukraine where 90% of the population don't want them. And if it doesn't make sense politically, it may make sense in terms of the violence that is sure to follow. A lose-lose situation for all concerned.
Freedland's article is here-
Netanyahu is an existential threat to Israel. He can be resisted – but only with Palestinian support | Jonathan Freedland | The Guardian
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Earlier this year the journal Foreign Affairs published a critique of the ‘Two State Solution’ in Israel claiming in reality there is already a ‘One State’ reality. The article received a collective reply from Michael Oren, and from various pro-Israeli Americans, including Martin Indyk and Robert Satloff. The links below also include an ignorant reply by Elliot Abrams.
What puzzles me is why American Zionists, if that is what they are, accept in Israel politicians they would not vote for in the US, and policies that are in some cases incompatible with the US Constitution. They are opposed to a One State solution that grants equal rights to all, which after all is implied in the Declaration of independence in 1948, but then you would never know Israel began life as a Socialist state because these days nobody wants to acknowledge this, just as David Ben-Gurion is no longer a hero just a forgotten man whose politics doesn’t fit with the contemporary narrative.
Obviously if a One State came into existence Israel in its present form would cease to exist, but its Jewish citizens and other Israeli citizens would continue to live where they are, but in equal standing to everyone else. And, as Israel is no longer threatened by any neighbouring State, indeed, is recognised by most Middle East states (for domestic reasons neither Syria nor Lebanon pose much of a threat), all Israel and the Palestinians need do is find the means to live together.
It doesn’t look promising right now, but the with a Fascist in power supported by Americans who either would never support Fascism in America, or who like Trump want an Autocracy to replace their democracy, it will take time before these people can heal themselves, to everyone’s benefit.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/middl...state-solution
https://www.cfr.org/blog/israel-turn...l-eliminate-it
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/israel-sur...170000900.html
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Tweedledum and Tweedledee are at it again, for how long who knows? Netanyahu, addicted to violence and confrontation is in his element -what HAMAS wants out of this nobody so far knows.
But this interests me- the response of Rishi Sunak:
"Israel has an absolute right to defend itself".
Fair point.
What rights do Palestinians have?
Israel ‘at war’, says Netanyahu, as fighter jets target Gaza after surprise attack by Hamas – live (theguardian.com)
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stavros
…
What rights do Palestinians have?
They don’t have the right to launch thousands of rockets against civilians or gun down civilians in the streets or take hostages.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rodinuk
They don’t have the right to launch thousands of rockets against civilians or gun down civilians in the streets or take hostages.
I agree with you.
16 Years of siege without end, an aggressive neighbour on one side, an indifferent one on the other, a lack of clear direction from its own so-called 'Authority' in Ramallah- one wonders when this, or how this relentless confrontation and violence will ever end.
Had Israel honoured the commitments it made in the Peace Treaty of 1993, had Netanyahu not joined Ariel Sharon's campaign to smash it to pieces over the corpse of Yitzhak Rabin, HAMAS might not have retained the internal loyalty it has (albeit with rivals, some of them even more vicious), as well as external supporters in Iran.
Had Tony Blair, when representing the 'Quartet' actually done something instead of renting property in Sheikh Jarrah and never visiting to ask the people of Gaza what they wanted -who knows if there might have been a working peace of some sort.
As I indicated above, I don't know what HAMAS's intentions are, other than a grim gesture on the 50th anniversary of the October War of 1973 -one which was also a humiliation for Syria, lest we forget that dismal, dysfunctional narco-state.
When the guns fall silent, and the dead have been buried, will there have been a single advance in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians? I doubt it.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Although much comment in the media has compared this surprise attack exposing weak Israeli intelligence, to the start of the October War of 1973, I think the most apt comparison is with the aftermath of Israel's defeat of the Arabs in 1967.
It was followed by the emergence of Fateh and the PFLP as militant groups prepared to take their conflict with Israel outside the region as well as expand its range inside it, but the wave of aeroplane hi-jackings and assassinations that marred the 1970s dealt a catastrophic blow to any sympathy the Palestinians might have been given for the way they have been treated over the last 100 years or so. Rashid Khalidi has documented this history in his book The 100 Years War Against Palestine, one of the finest books on Palestinian history ever written.
As the world lines up behind the very same state, Israel, that has done so much to reject peace instead of war, that has allowed Settlers on the West Bank to murder Palestinians at will, plough up and steal their land, that in reality does nothing to stop the harassment of Christians in Jerusalem, one wonders if another catastrophe is going to engulf this part of the world, but with more serious consequences.
This is because not only is Netanyahu a criminal on every level, in effect at war with the citizens of his own country with his Fascist agenda, he treats peace and negotiations for peace with absolute contempt. HAMAS, after their election victory in 2006 offered talks without pre-conditions, which Israel dismissed, in itself no surprise as by 2006 the 1993 Treaty was considered by people like Netanyahu a betrayal, while refusing to tell anyone how Israel proposed to accommodate 4 million Palestinians.
Thus, the stage is set for mass expulsions, if the hard-liners in the Israeli Cabinet have their way, and though that sounds extreme, Syria in effect expelled 4 million or more during the civil war there; Saudi Arabia's futile war in the Yemen has displaced either another 4, or 14 million depending on the sources, so the expulsions if it happened, or if people are driven out of Gaza by relentless bombing is what they call 'on trend'.
But where can the Palestinians go? Most Palestinians in the Emirate were expelled from Kuwait after the 1991 war, many went to Jordan -but Jordan cannot take 4 million or even 1, having taken in as many from Syria.
If HAMAS is acting on its own and Iran's agenda -HAMAS has been supported by Iran in much the same way the PLO was supported by the USSR-and the aim is to prevent Saudi Arabia from 'normalizing' relations with Israel, it has gone about it the wrong way. It does present a dilemma for the Saudis who used to believe the whole of the Middle East should be part of their Kingdom of violence and hate, and who have always for that reason been ultra-sensitive to the issue of Jerusalem, so it remains to be seen how diplomacy is affected by this action.
Again -1993 could have, should have led to a just settlement of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians: it addressed the obvious: how do millions of people sharing the same space get on with each other? Sharon and Netanyahu smashed it to pieces for the price of their personal commitment to a Zionist project that was either doomed from the start, or could only be realized through permanent war: when Herzl was asked by Khalidi's great grandfather what would happen to the Palestinians in his 'Jewish State' Herzl had no answer -either he couldn't be bothered, or he knew the answer was a negative of gigantic proportions.
Nationalism, in this context, remains today what it was in the 19th century: a curse on humanity.
That said, in its Declaration of Independence in 1948 Israel said it would respect the rights of non-Jewish people living in Palestine/Israel, a declaration now treated as toilet paper by Netanyahu and the Fascist idiots he has recruited into his shambolic Government.
The US, as usual, has failed to deal with the conflict -it is easy enough to bring other Arab states into a normal relationship with Israel, though the sight of Jared Kushner presiding over the 'Abraham Accords' when he and his family stood to benefit financially from it was one of the lowest moments in American Middle East diplomacy, if that is what it was. It appeared at the time as merely a business arrangement for Kushner, consolidated after he left office with his billion dollar deal with the Kingdom of 9/11.
So it looks like the Palestinians are on their own again, or have friends that most people would avoid -Iran, and in that shadow, Putin, though I don't know what he thinks he can, or can do.
The scale of casualties and the circumstances are deplorable, distressing, and destructive. Nobody gets out of this with pride, there is no victory here, but that was always the case with this permanently bleeding wound.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
This is not directed towards anyone here but I often see these same issues that come up with respect to civilians and you can either trust me or not that I am not responding to a strawman among either Palestinian or Israeli partisans. Civilians should be viewed as innocent whether you think their government is on the right or wrong side of a conflict. There are people who take themselves seriously who defend either Israeli atrocities or atrocities of Hamas and it ends up making the easiest part of the conversation complicated.
The people at the music festival were no more responsible for Israel's occupation than I am for the U.S.' invasion of Iraq (which I was obviously against) but there are Americans and Brits who feel perfectly comfortable saying they deserved to die or try to imply some culpability. It's always a stretch when people do this and it always looks like some predetermined attempt to exact vengeance of some kind. Speaking of which...
There are supporters of Israel who think Israel is justified doing anything it wants in Gaza. That is a sadistic and genocidal mentality (to people who want Israel to "flatten Gaza".....that is a disgraceful, pig view). I've already seen video of Israel committing war crimes. Dropping bombs on apartment buildings because you think there might be one or two militants inside along with three families? It's no less cruel a form of murder. And I am aware that Israel has killed more Palestinian civilians than Hamas has killed Israeli civilians.
Finally, there are people who think that opposing the sadistic murder of people at a music festival, multiple documented acts of rape, kidnapping, and parading around an elderly lady with dementia somehow makes someone a hypocrite for wanting Ukraine to expel Russia from Ukraine. I not only would not defend Ukrainian soldiers going to Moscow and killing civilians and raping women, I wouldn't defend crimes against Russian soldiers who have surrendered.
The final point is that people want to know what Palestinians can do militarily against a country that is better armed. Before anyone could even attempt to justify the killing of civilians to achieve a political or military objective there has to be a probability greater than zero that it achieves that objective. Otherwise, it's not Machiavellian. It's pure sadism if it can't succeed.
I just thought I'd say that. Sadly, it looks to me like there will be much more cruelty and death before Palestinians have a state.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Broncofan, I agree with what you say. I tend to ignore the grotesque responses which on both sides feed, and are fed by the dreadful violence. On Channel 4 News this evening an Israeli man whose family members have been taken hostage had an understandable rage, but it made me wonder why they interviewed him in such circumstances.
The obvious response to the hostage situation is for Israel to suspend military operations in Gaza and open negotiations to free their citizens, not to bomb Gaza with the risk that hostages might be that sick phrase, 'Collateral Damage'. Netanyahu can't think beyond a bayonet to grasp the essentials in this conflict, but as one of its architects, perhaps he feels obliged to wage war, war, and yet more war -for what? The leadership of HAMAS can leave just as the PLO left the West Bank to Jordan in 1967, and on being expelled from Jordan in 1971 went to Lebanon, and then when Israel bombed Beirut, left for Tunis. In the end, they were on the White House lawn signing the treaty. Can that happen again? In theory, but Israel is different now, and I don't think the mood is there to talk.
Netanyahu doesn't negotiate. Right now, neither does HAMAS. Days of Doom ahead.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Quote:
Originally Posted by
broncofan
The final point is that people want to know what Palestinians can do militarily against a country that is better armed. Before anyone could even attempt to justify the killing of civilians to achieve a political or military objective there has to be a probability greater than zero that it achieves that objective. Otherwise, it's not Machiavellian. It's pure sadism if it can't succeed.
Most likely the primary objective was to derail the normalisation of relations between Israel and Arab countries (which has ignored the Palestinian issue). In this they may well succeed. If an indiscrimate Israeli response causes widespread death and suffering to innocent Palestinians it will be very hard for the Saudis to continue the process.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...alestine-hamas
The idea that ends justify any means is morally repugnant, but it's important to understand motives rather than dismissing it as senseless violence. This was Hamas's way of shattering complacent assumptions in Israel and elsewhere that Palestinians could continue to be mistreated or ignored without much risk of blowback.
Of course, the Israeli response will only increase suffering for Palestinians in the immediate future. Hamas is cynically calculating that this will gain it more support. Disrupting Arab-Israeli normalisation won't necessarily help the Palestinians either. But I can understand the concern about Arab governments giving Israel what it wants without extracting any meaningful concessions on Palestinian rights.
The basic problem here is that there are too many players on both sides who think that there interests are best served by conflict. Perhaps there is a limit to what outside governments can do, but they could certainly do more to change the benefit-cost calculation. One of the reasons Israel has been so intransigent is that the US never makes it pay any price for it's behaviour.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
I agree. I definitely agree that Israeli intransigence is caused by the U.S. providing vetoes for obvious violations of international law. If I were Israeli I would want the international response to my government's behavior to be very sensitive to incentives. Build settlements in West Bank and immiserate Gazans, get sanctioned. Extend an olive branch, let there be diplomatic support and people not reading the most cynical imaginable motive into it.
I think my analysis of Hamas' motives was just simplistic. I haven't thought strategically about it. But by the time Israel gets done bombing Gaza everyone is going to be gunshy for a while. I'm going just based on gut feel but I think this will end up being harmful to Palestinians. Yes maybe Arab States are gonna be scared off by Israel's response bc I think it's gonna be brutal. But I also think Israel's support went up in the West, particularly among people who don't pay a lot of attention to the conflict. Of course, Israel is not finished by a long shot and historically they haven't been long on restraint.
Yes, change the cost-benefit situation is important if there's going to be an end to the conflict.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Since 1967, but with more urgency after 1973, Israel's position has been to engage in bi-lateral negotiations with individual states, to reject any attempt at a regional settlement, on the basis it would be outnumbered by hostile actors and be forced to make concessions it thinks undermines the whole purpose of a Jewish State. Sadat's overtures to Israel after the October War of 1973 led to the 1979 treaty and became the template of the way Israel intended to go, negotiating with everyone it could find except the most obvious, the PLO. That Yitzhak Rabin did agree to the peace talks and eventually shake Arafat's hand, thus became the one bi-lateral agreement that involved the concessions which Nationalists like Sharon and Netanyahu believed were a betrayal of the fundamental cause. We are living with the consequences of their rejection.
But what the Treaty did on the Palestinian side was also concede, in this case, territorial control of the West Bank, divided into zones which prevented the free movement of Palestinians, followed by the re-location of the Berlin Wall on land stolen from Palestinians which the Palestinian authority was powerless to prevent, and an aggressive expansion of Settlements, and in more recent years, the right of Settlers to arm themselves and kill any Arab they see as a threat, again with no effective response from the PA. One retired Arab former Minister, in the days when I met such people in the 1990s, told me bluntly: 'Arafat has betrayed every Arab'. The Peace Treaty, it was argued, gave the Palestinians nothing but humiliation and weakness.
There are 'rejection fronts' of both sides, and it appears they are in control, or at least in Gaza.
As for the international dimension, it has always been riven with contradictions: the Coalition of the Willing that formed to eject Iraq from Kuwait in 1990-91, but not Willing when it was Turkey in Northern Cyprus, or Israel in either the Jabal al-Jawlan or the West Bank, the US when Trump was President endorsing the annexation of Syrian territory, even as today it refuses to accept Russia's attempt to annex Ukraine. Azerbaijan annexes Nagorno-Karabagh, India annexes Kashmir, and nobody can, or wants to do anything about it; and one assumes there are Serbian Nationalists who can't understand the existence of Kosovo and want the territory returned to them- if necessary, by force. In other words, there is no consistency. And I assume the same Republicans who want the US to stop funding the Ukraine on the basis it is a foreign war of no interest to the US will use increased funding and military support for Israel as some kind of litmus test of its 'Values'. Nikki Haley appears to think an attack on Israel is an attack on the US, a dangerous way to go.
Nothing new here, just the same refusal by responsible people to make the hardest choices, when the hardest choice is peace and negotiation, rather than war and destruction. With so many hysterical reactions on all sides, the immediate hope for talks is remote if not impossible, but precisely what Netanyahu ought to be doing, at least until he is forced out of office as some now predict. But that also begs the question of HAMAS, given that they have no strategic purpose other than 'shock and awe' and no political plan for the future. But when 'Shock and Awe' is the daily bread, there is no appetite for progress. Or will this conflict produce another round of secret talks, maybe even in Oslo? Should one always hope for the best, lest it be replaced by the worst?
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
The worst thing about the grotesque, gruesome violence that has been taking place, is that if you go back in history there is a dismal record of such atrocities taking place, and there is not even any point in identifying who did what to whom, for the only consequence is despair. The Peace Treaty that was supposed to end this, was ended by the same people now screaming for their lives, as if the demolition of the Treaty meant something else, something better.
Now consider Haley, the Comet blazing a trail to the White House -what she has said echoes what Menachem Begin said in 1982 when Israel invaded Lebanon vowing to destroy the PLO. He didn't live to see Israel shake hands with the PLO, and I don't doubt he would have condemned it, but what does Haley know, this ignorant, pathetic Republican more determined to use this grim episode in Israeli-Palestinian relations as part of her own campaign to be America's Chief Executive?
Has she ever been to Gaza? And as for the question, What Rights to Palestinians Have? There seems to be no answer, or maybe it is that people are terrified of telling us what it is.
https://akm-img-a-in.tosshub.com/ind...7AjgnAd16haeUR
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
This is the same mindset that followed 9-11. If it was an attack on America does that mean that the US should get involved in another Middle Eastern war?
I know Nikki Haley is a Ukraine supporter, but it's interesting that none of the Republicans opposing assistance to Ukraine seem to have any qualms about giving Israel whatever it wants. Wouldn't the same arguments apply? Isn't this another territorial dispute in a far away country? Isn't it also an intractible conflict with no end in sight? And why are Hamas's war crimes more abhorrent than Russia's?
https://www.politico.com/news/magazi...e-aid-00120982
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
It's not only in America that this is happening.
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...s-war-response
As I said, this is very reminiscent of the post-9/11 mentality that led to the Iraq invasion. The same strident demands that people be as gung-ho as possible in backing Israel. The same equating of those concerned about Palestinian civilians as being soft on terrorism.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
To which one makes the dismal point that the response to 9/11 was the war against al-Qaeda and the Taliban Govt of Afghanistan that nurtured them and allowed them to use their country to organize the attacks.
After the fall of the Taliban in 2002 Tony Blair crowed in the House of Commons about the success of the campaign which some people had opposed at the time -where are the Taliban now?
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
In his probably now little read book, Power and the Pursuit of Peace, Harry Hinsley, discussing the First World War, makes a distinction between the causes of war, and the occasion which sparks off the fighting. The assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand of Austria may have occasioned the war, but the cause of the war is now accepted to be Imperial Germany's ambition to dominate Europe.
I make this point to suggest that while the atrocity carried out by HAMAS last Saturday, and it's continuing violations of international law, decency and pretty much everything else, has occasioned the present war, it is not its cause.
The cause, I suggest is the rejection of the Oslo Peace process that appeared to culminate in the 1993 Treaty between Israel and the PLO. However unsatisfactory it was for the Palestinians, who agreed to the demarcation of the West Bank into Zones which by definition diluted its actual authority, for those Israelis who have been in Govt since, Yitzhak Rabin betrayed Israel merely by negotiating with them.
It was no surpise that Ariel Sharon rejected peace in favour of war, given that he dedicated his entire life to killing Arabs on the basis that they could never, and never should be trusted, and that in ideological terms, his agenda of 'Jewish Nationalism' by definition meant that a Jewish State could not, and should not admit non-Jews, something that Netanyahu has tried to enshrine in law. Whether or not this makes Israel a Fascist state one can debate. Without doubt, some of the militant terrorists in the Mandate period, such as Avraham Sterm, trained in the camp at Civitavecchia set up by Mussolini, whom Stern regarded as the kid of leader he wanted to be.
It has been a contentious issue within Israel, because when Ben-Gurion issued the Declaration of the State of Israel in 1948, and in the absence of a written Constitution, it stood for many years as a definition of what Israel wanted to be, it guaranteed minority rights, whereas the rejectionist militants of Likud and its fanatical partners in Govt take the view that all forms of negotiation are appeasement, all forms of compromise betrayal. Netanyahu lives in an either/or world in which Palestinians either accept what Israel offers, or they are dismissed as irrelevant.
It means that with no hope of peace being a priority -and I can't recall a single external power outside the region putting any pressure on Israel to negotiate with the Palestinians, the Palestinians have actually found that the 'land for peace' they thought was in the 1993 Treaty, has meant land for Settlers, not them. The weakness of the PA has undermined Palestinians, but now consider this:
Grooming. I propose that with his rejection of peace, Netanyahu has Groomed HAMAS and Islamic Jihad to take precisely the military actions that we have seen. He has in effect dared them to take on Israel at what Israel believes it is invincible: war, and I don't doubt that Israel will wage war without mercy, and without caring one way or another who lives or who dies, even though it will fail to destroy HAMAS or any other Palestinian group, or the tunnels which will be re-built in 5 or ten years time, because this occasion does not deal with the cause, and the cause is the refusal by Israel to embrace diversity, and to accept that Israelis and Arabs share the same land and must share it equally.
Other than the causes, is there any material difference between Netanyahu, Bashar al-Assad, or Vladimir Putin? Absolute contempt for international law, absolute determination to get what they want with maximum violence, absolute contempt for human life. That anyone supports such people is the measure of how far we are from 1945 and that now empty phrase 'Never Again'. After all, would the world be cursed by HAMAS if they were not given a cause to fight for, and groomed by their enemy to do it?
Still worth reading if you have the time
Power and the Pursuit of Peace: Theory and Practice in the History of Relations Between States: Amazon.co.uk: Hinsley: 9780521094481: Books
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Quote:
Originally Posted by
filghy2
The same equating of those concerned about Palestinian civilians as being soft on terrorism.
Someone who does this should lose credibility for all time. I could not have been more sensitive to the atrocity carried out by Hamas and yet was worried in advance about the Israeli response. Netanyahu has proved many of my worst fears correct and he risks an enormous catastrophe by fucking with Gaza's electrical supply and water supply to try to get leverage for hostage release. He is basically holding the entire Gaza strip hostage, turning it into an inferno for civilians, and killing at least as many civilians as militants. Biden should have immediately condemned the denial of basic services to Gaza as a war crime and I think every other country should too.
There are people who are talking about defense and rights to defense. There are ways to fight militants embedded within civilian populations without bombing large buildings or cutting off utilities to the entire population and they are more costly to your forces but they would not be obvious collective punishment.
After the massacre by Hamas, Netanyahu could have tried to secure the country against any further attacks (the dead are dead and can't be revived by killing), and then tried to galvanize international support. There are a lot of things he could have done that would not have been capitulation at all but would not have been vengeance based.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Quote:
Originally Posted by
broncofan
After the massacre by Hamas, Netanyahu could have tried to secure the country against any further attacks (the dead are dead and can't be revived by killing), and then tried to galvanize international support. There are a lot of things he could have done that would not have been capitulation at all but would not have been vengeance based.
It is not in Netanyahu's character to show any sign of compassion or compromise or even think of negotiating with Palestinians unless they know in advance they will be required to give something up for nothing in return. Israel is dealing with decades, not so much of the 'iron wall' -the one with holes in it- but an 'iron will' which refuses to accept that Palestinians must have an equal stake in the future of the land between the river and the sea. It is the argument you can find in hundreds of pamphlets, articles and books that says quite simply -'Jordan is Palestine', or 'there are lots of Arab countries the Palestinians can live in, they should go'. For what it's worth I used to know a Jordanian nationalist who argued it was time for Palestinians to leave Jordan and go back across the river.
The whole point of the Oslo Peace Talks and the Treaty of 1993, was that the two sides did negotiate, they did treat each other as equals, they did commit to a new paradigm, but it scared the shit out Sharon and his Myrmidons who made the fateful decision to first oppose, and then destroy that process and that promise of a better future.
We are all living with the mistakes made since the assassination of Rabin, and while I think a lot of Israelis can now see how Netanyahu and people like him have led the country into its most serious military conflict since, if not 2006 then 1973, and want him gone, I don't see or so far have heard few voices arguing for another paradigm shift, also known as a practical solution.
If it gets really bad, and it will be bad, what will the Saudis do? For some time the Arabs have abandoned the Palestinians to their fate, but if some fanatic attacks either the al-Aqsa Mosque or the Mosque of Omar, all bets are off. It could in theory, if MbS insists his long term aim to normalize relations with Israel is still on, force a change in the Kingdom -after all, he is not the King yet. Will the Arabs who signed that Trump-Kushner Business Deal called the 'Abraham Accords' stay mute on the sidelines, excepting Qatar which gives office space to HAMAS?
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Quote:
Originally Posted by
broncofan
Netanyahu has proved many of my worst fears correct and he risks an enormous catastrophe by fucking with Gaza's electrical supply and water supply to try to get leverage for hostage release. He is basically holding the entire Gaza strip hostage, turning it into an inferno for civilians, and killing at least as many civilians as militants.
Many more civilians, most likely. It's not likely Israel has accurate intelligence in Gaza to target their attacks, given they missed the preparations for the Hamas attack.
Those who want to level Gaza to destroy Hamas clearly don't see Palestinians as people whose lives matter. It's disingenuous to say they chose this and must accept the consequences. The majority did vote for Hamas in 2006, but there's been no election since. No doubt there are many who instinctively support whoever is fighting the government that oppresses them, but many would also be tired of Hamas bringing retaliation on them. But what can they do against a heavily-armed movement? They can't escape either because it's a small area and both borders are closed.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
It is as if we are going backwards in history. I never thought that I would hear the kind of anti-Semitic garbage on the streets of the UK that is more reminiscent of the 1930s. Fla waving morons are not in short supply. My generation learned from our parents what actually happened in the two World Wars of the 20th century, a new generation either does not know, or does not care, and when you add to that the ignorance and lies that gave us Brexit, Trump and Putin, it is hard not be scared for the future.
One historian argues that the ' HAMAS apocalypse' is creating a New World Order -also an article riddled with ignorance, as if the Prof had never heard of that phrase New World Order before, even though when George HW Bush used it he could at least argue that with the fall of the Berlin Wall and with it the USSR, the old bi-Polar, Cold War structure to 'super-power relations' had gone.
At that time, American Hegemony was the favoured term; then we were told we are in a 'Multi-Polar world' which soon became characterized as an age of 'Globalization' which has had its most vicious critics in Trump, Le Pen and Farage as if their favoured offering was different from the economic Nationalism that formed part of the wave of Falangist, Fascist and National Socialist failures of the 1930s and 1940s.
There is no New World Order -what we have is the same Nationalist Violence that claims legitimacy as 'the armed struggle', whether it was the failure of the IRA to use it to create a 'United Ireland', or the modus vivendi which was used in the Mandate period by Jewish Terrorists who murdered British soldiers and statesmen, and in Count Folke Bernadotte, the first senior official of the United Nations to be a victim of anti-UN hate. What was the victory for this armed struggle? More violence, not less, from Qibya to today, as if the identity of the assassins makes any difference.
And this Armed Struggle is the same mode of political violence being used by HAMAS that was called off by the PLO for the simple reason it wasn't working, and in its lifetime failed to achieve anything other than killing people and in some cases at some times, killing hope too, as people all over the world reeled in shock and not much awe at the scope of such violence.
Thus today, the Armed Struggle remains the primary mode of politics where it has consistently failed. Every year Netanyahu goes to a celebration -yes, a Celebration- of the terrorist attack on the King David Hotel, because he thinks it is something to be proud of, and it underlines his personal commitment to war over peace.
And consider this argument, in riposte to the UK sending the Royal Navy to the Eastern Mediterranean- Israel has been for most of its existence an enemy of the UK; it is not our friend, and never has been. From the Mandate period when future Israelis murdered British soldiers wherever they could find then, to 1982 when Israel's Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, who had personally taken part in attacks on the British, and hated the UK, supported Argentina's war for the 'Malvinas'/Falkland Islands with rhetoric and military ordnance.
We await a paradigm shift -another one, similar to that of 1993- without bated breath. It is as if we - or they- do not learn the lessons of history, or read their history and insist -'we can do it differently this time', and this applies to HAMAS, Israel, Hizballah, as well in retrospect to that nauseating pair of hypocrites and war criminals, George W. Bush and Tony Blair. It was Blair who said this in a documentary about the war in Iraq for which he remains responsible:
"I took the view we needed to remake the Middle East". (There must be more than 1,000 books and articles that document this concept of power, and its application to a region that is fed up with being 'remade' by people who don't live there, but don't ask Jared Kushner for a list as he has only read 20, he said so himself).
Hence Auden
"History opposes its grief to our buoyant song. To our hope its warning'.
The Hamas Apocalypse has crafted a New World Order (yahoo.com)
Why Rishi Sunak is deploying British armed forces to Israel (yahoo.com)
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
The article in The Daily Beast linked below is a moving account of what happened to the network of Kibbutz in the Gaza area. It resonates with that dream many Zionists had in the 19th and early 20th century based on the fiction that Palestine was empty and under-developed, that Zionism would 'make the desert bloom'. Nevertheless, agricultural and communal living, often but not exclusively Socialist in belief, was a major part of the Labour Government's strategy for developing Israel after 1948, and though it was relatively successful, it did not survive the Nationalist decline that set in when Begin became Prime Minister in 1977. It means today the Kibbutz movement represents less than 5% of the country, perhaps a measure of how Israel has changed since 1948, or 1967.
It is also the case that many, perhaps most of Israel's agricultural workers are from South-East Asia, Thailand in particular as the other link explains. I used to know a Trans woman from the Philippines who worked in care homes in Israel, indeed i think most care workers in Israel are from the Philippines, and believe domestic servants are also from the PI or from Sri Lanka -not sure about this. As far as i know none of the immigrant workers have legal equality with citizens of Israel, but are not top of the list when it comes to expulsion from the country -we know who they are.
I think it is important to recognize the changes that have taken place since Israel was created in 1948, yet the final irony might be that the original proposal in Theodor Herzl's book The Jewish State suggested from the start that if Israel was not exclusively Jewish, it would not make sense- Herzl was not a Socialist, though many Zionists were; he was not a Democrat either, and when asked by a prominent Palestinian intellectual what would happen to non-Jews in this 'Jewish State' Herzl, who I think visited Palestine once or twice, had no answer. In that either/or mentality which forms the basis of most of the cursed nonsense called Nationalism, who belongs in the land between the river and the sea?
Worst Failure in Israeli History: Netanyahu Abandoned the Very Heart of Israel (yahoo.com)
Thai death toll spotlights poor agricultural workers from Asia who toil in Israel's fields | CNN
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
I guess it is just a matter of time before he goes, but what damage can be done before he resigns or is sacked?
How Benjamin Netanyahu empowered Hamas ... and broke Israel (yahoo.com)
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
This article is one of the more interesting on the background to the current crisis. But as usual, it does not address the most obvious question, which asks what a just and equal peace would look like for Israel and the Palestinians. And until some flesh is put on this writhing skeleton, death is all we have.
The danger of leaving things be: how the world ‘failed miserably’ in the Middle East (yahoo.com)
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
A few points-
1) Biden's mission was not a failure, even though the Arabs ducked out, for domestic reasons. The pre-meeting negotiations conducted by Blinken did result in what the US-Arab meetings would have confirmed: a key agreement by Egypt to open the Rafah Border crossing for 20 trucks of food, clothing, medicine, something that Israel would have agreed to. That said, it is a small step for a major problem, but a step in the right direction -and far from the US position being weakened, it at least maintains a significant presence for Israel and the Arabs, at a cost of $100m which, should the GOP in the House focus on something other than their own incompetence, they might oppose.
2) Other than Biden, there is no leadership in the region. Sisi is a military dictator unchallenged in Egypt, but with little clout in the region -consider how Egypt's prominence has fallen since 1967, The Jordanians with their links to the West Bank and the administration of the Al-Aqsa/Dome of the Rock compound, have channels that link the US to Israel and the Palestine Authority, such as it is, and as usual, Jordan remains a key player few people acknowledge.
The leadership of Hamas is in Qatar, while it's military commanders are either dead, or in hiding -as such, and though Hamas is a social movement as well as a military-political force, it is not clear how shaken the organization is by the incursion into Israel which, grim though it is, was more successful than they expected -normally a rapid response would have meant a few days of firefighting, a roster of martyrs and the wounded going home to lick their wounds. Thus has a chicken run turned into a crisis I doubt Hamas intended it to be.
3) The informers in Gaza that Israel uses, and Jordan too, may have tipped off Israel as to where the hostages are, though I assume those still alive are not concentrated in one place. The delay in the ground invasion Biden has secured, is also part of the IDF plan to locate and free the hostages, given that as far as we know, no negotiations are taking place. Could the leadership in Qatar be involved? It could be, but it could be that militants on the ground who expect to be killed, ignore their political masters and take the hostages with them, and grim as this sounds, grim is order of the day.
4) the future. The link to the Telegraph article suggests the US and others, presumably Israel, and contacts in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia, envisage the 'end' to this phase, as the creation of a buffer zones along the border with Israel to distance the Arab population from Israel, but with the long term intention of pouring money -presumably Arab -American?- money into what sounds to me like a fantasy, as described here- "Gaza on the Med".
I kid you not, you can read it here-
Western leaders have a vision for a future Palestinian state (yahoo.com)
Who is going to represent the Palestinians in all this? The PA is in crisis, HAMAS is in crisis, Islamic Jihad has even less support in Gaza than HAMAS, and what is going to happen to the leadership in Israel, if, as many think, Netanyahu's days are numbered, but as yet, we don't know how the fanatics and the settlers will act, given that right now they appear to be 'holding fire'.
In 1993, Yitzhak Rabin had the authority no other current Israeli politician has, and though he paid for it with his life, his endorsement of the Oslo Accords was what made the Treaty possible. Right now, and in the absence of Biden, I see little traction for either Putin or Xi in the region, and little confidence in Israel, where I suspect the mood is still stoked for vengeance.
But at least Biden has made an effort, and achieved something, though I doubt he will get much credit for it back home.
I just hope somewhere in those shadows, there is some serious negotiations going on for the hostages, and for more humanitarian aid, for water and electricity to be turned back on. Is it too much to ask?
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Re Hamas, I think I should have argued that, from what I have read, their strategic aims were a) to puncture the Israeli 'iron wall' and expose their security failings; and b) to send a warning message to Saudi Arabia with regard to any moves to diplomatic recognition. Their event was related to the problems of order in the Haram as-Sharif in Jerusalem, which resonated with the Saudis who, after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, took the view that the Middle East should be integrated into a single Saudi kingdom.
On both counts though ends in themselves, they do not advance the cause of Palestinian statehood at any level, and in terms of the actual impact, have damaged themselves and the Palestinians in global terms, a setback which is why I am sceptical of the 'Gaza on the Med' concept.
I said Putin and Xi are not effective in the region, though Xi has been trying to broker a peace between Saudi Arabia and Iran, but then that has been going on for a couple of years now, and right now I don't know if it will happen, or, even if it does, it will deal with the unresolved war in the Yemen and that country's future political structure. One problem just leads to another in this region.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Two more hostages have been released by HAMAS, and though welcome, it is or appears to be a mirror to the pathetic 20 trucks a day now passing through the border with Egypt.
I read somewhere HAMAS thought the hostages would give it some leverage with the Israeli Govt, in which case it just proves what has been known about war since ancient times -how once begun, the aims are diverted by facts and faults on the ground, how assumptions made are quickly demolished. HAMAS of all the organizations in the region, knows that without a doubt any action against Israel will be met with ten times the volume, so I return to an idea I had that HAMAS never expected their action to take them so far into Israel without being challenged, and that they have in effect, over-reached themselves.
The irony is that even with the might of Israel, so far a relentless aerial bombardment which, being Israel, has absolutely no respect for human life or the international law that Israel has ridiculed since the formation of the UN, there is some nervousness in both Israel and the US about ground forces entering Gaza. Smart thinking argues that it will be focused on the intelligence Israel has about the location of the hostages, and whatever cells HAMAS has, though one assumes they have dispersed across Gaza along with the hostages, increasing the risks.
Again and again, one comes back to the staggering fact that in order to smash the Peace Treaty to pieces and deny the Palestinians the smallest of territorial and political gains the Treaty seemed to promise, first Sharon, then Netanyahu made love to HAMAS to breed the monster we now have, because for years now
"Israeli policy was to treat the Palestinian Authority as a burden and Hamas as an asset. Far-right MK Bezalel Smotrich, now the finance minister in the hardline government and leader of the Religious Zionism party, said so himself in 2015.
According to various reports, Netanyahu made a similar point at a Likud faction meeting in early 2019, when he was quoted as saying that those who oppose a Palestinian state should support the transfer of funds to Gaza, because maintaining the separation between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza would prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state."
For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel
To see world leaders beating a path to Netanyahu's door is sickening, if predictable when there is no-one else to talk to, when a filthy anti-semitism is poisoning any debate in Europe and North America, where there has rarely been any sensible debate about the Middle East anyway.
This grim episode is going to continue for some time, and I doubt Netanyahu or Gallant care one way or the other what the US wants or thinks, though I do think Blinken, though biased, is doing what he can through various channels in the region to warn Israel of the risks it is taking. But then, what was HAMAS thinking when it launched this mad operation, and what is it thinking now? I suspect the political leaders in Qatar have lost control of the militants on the ground, and unless one of the two parties gives up this misery will continue.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
One hopes the claim that hostage negotiations have stalled is not true, but right now it is looking grim for all in Gaza.
In the last few days, it has been reported that Qatar, after talks with Blinken, has agreed to review the status of Hamas in Qatar. The suggestion is that if and when Qatar successfully mediates with Hamas to release the hostages -the former leader of Hamas has said if Israel stops its bombing this will make the release more likely- Hamas will re-locate. The link below suggests Algeria, or Syria, but I doubt Hamas would go to Iran. They might enjoy the money and probably ordnance they get from Iran, but Hamas has its roots in the militant Sunni groups that emerged in Egypt around the Muslim Brotherhood, so I don't see much affinity there once the convenient relationship is done with. I would have thought the aim is to move to a country Israel is reluctant to bomb, which suggests Turkey, though Algeria is a possibility.
But history records that after being expelled from Jordan in 1971, the PLO moved to Beirut, and after being expelled from Beirut in 1982 they went to Tunis, and then ended up in Ramallah having signed a Peace Treaty with Israel. Arafat for some was if not an obvious scion of the Muslim Brotherhood, a sympathiser with that strain of militant Islam, so the parallels remain in place, just as the decades long refusal to talk and choose war instead led both Israel and the Palestinians nowhere.
Qatar agrees to review Hamas ties after Gaza hostage situation resolved - report - The Times of Israel
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
As if singing from the same song sheet of Hamas, here comes Netanyahu, an architect of the very hate, violence and war that we see today, confirming he is a war criminal, unfit for any public office, bereft of human decency. This is what he said
"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu dismissed the idea that Israel would agree to a ceasefire with Hamas, saying Monday evening that those calling for one are in effect calling for Israel to surrender to terrorism.“I want to make clear Israel’s position regarding a ceasefire. Just as the United States would not agree to a ceasefire after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, or after the terrorist attack of 9/11, Israel will not agree to a cessation of hostilities with Hamas,” he said in English during a press conference for foreign media.
“After the horrific attacks of October 7, calls for a ceasefire are calls for Israel to surrender to Hamas, to surrender to terrorism, to surrender to barbarism. That will not happen,” he said."
Netanyahu dismisses calls for ceasefire, says that would be surrender to Hamas | The Times of Israel
Israel can bomb Gaza into dust any time it wants to, and he knows it. Hamas was supported by Israel when it was formed, and he knows it. Israel encouraged Hamas throughout its existence, and he knows it.
Who regarded the Treaty Rabin signed as a surrender? Netanyahu. Who took land away from the Palestinians and gave it to the Settlers? Netanyahu. Who joined Hamas to create the Strategy of Tension that has led to this slaughter of the innocents? Netanyahu.
Aided by a United States that has never, and probably never will understand the realities of the history that denied the Statehood to the successors to the Ottoman Empire, as if King-Crane never happened, the same Statehood that was conferred on those small European successors to the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires after the First World War- two of which no longer exist.
A man so dedicated to violence and war that he dismisses a ceasefire as surrender? Sure. When the absolutely critical issue for Israel is the release of the hostages, and for Palestinians in Gaza access to food, water and shelter, the most basic of human rights. When the distressing footage on tv indicates an absence of care for all.
As if there were no other way of living with the realities that have been churned over in a machinery of death for more than 100 years, other than to repeat the same mistakes over, and over again. As if a Jew called Netanyahu can only sneer at what Rabbi Hillel said
'Where there are no men, be thou a man'.
Monsters came to Israel on the 7th of October, 2023. Then came Netanyahu. Just another monster.
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Hamas and Israel, eyeless in Gaza.
Should Israel from Philistian yoke deliver;
Ask for this great Deliverer now, and find him [ie, Samson]
Eyeless in Gaza at the Mill with slaves
(John Milton, Samson Agonistes)
For a different view from 2008-
Zionism's 60th Celebration of a Paradise Lost - Palestine Chronicle
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Netanyahu, a war criminal who deserves to stand trial in The Hague. One hopes he shares the court room with any surviving leaders of HAMAS, given they supported each other from the start.
"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reportedly rejected a negotiated deal over Israeli hostages that would have seen a five-day ceasefire in Gaza, according to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to The Guardian.The deal would have seen the release of children, women, and elderly and sick hostages, the sources said.
Netanyahu's reported refusal of the proposed deal came soon after Hamas' initial 7 October attack on southern Israel that killed 1,400 Israelis.
Other sources had said that further negotiations had taken place for the release of a larger number of hostages prior to the ground offensive."
Netanyahu 'rejected hostages for ceasefire deal' in Gaza (newarab.com)
Netanyahu's roots on the Nationalist, occasionally Fascist right of Palestinian/Israeli politics.
Netanyahu, the godfather of modern Israeli fascism | Benjamin Netanyahu | Al Jazeera
Einstein’s nightmare: the fascist politicians wielding power in Israel - Red Pepper
From Latin Quarter to the Knesset. The History and Evolution of the Israeli Far-Right (oasiscenter.eu)
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
An interesting perspective on what comes after Israel's demolition of Gaza, but without any smart minds in Israel to do the right thing and concede Palestinians have rights, and must also have them in practical terms.
Israel is looking to World War II in its Gaza fight, and it risks taking lessons from the wrong war (yahoo.com)
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
The Middle East Forum and is journal is published by Daniel Pipes and like-minded American supporters of Israel who share the existential view on which Netanyahu has based his violent policy of permanent war, and no peace. It means, quite simply, that everything in the 100 year conflict is a matter of either-or. Either Israel takes the action necessary to survive Palestinian attacks, or it dies.
From this perspective, to fulfil the Likud's aim of creating an Erez Israel on both sides of the River Jordan (note that, as it is not often proclaimed, and is another reason why 'From the River to the Sea' is just an empty slogan), the 1993 Peace Treaty was a betrayal of the Zionist dream, though I think Zionism is a redundant term and what we are really talking about is Nationalism, and at that a form of Jewish Nationalism that is a form of Fascism.
Thus, in the Fall 2023 edition of their journal, Pipes and two others responded to an article on the future of Gaza, and the point of interest is in the article by Martin Sherman, because even before the 7th October massacres and what we witness today, he reached the conclusion, as bleak as any I have read, but probably the logical position of the existentialist view, ie: the only solution to the Palestinian problem, is to remove the Palestinians! And if not by 'kinetic' means....well, read it for yourself-
"...the only way for Jerusalem to determine how Gaza is ruled—and by whom—is to rule it itself. The only way for the Israelis to rule Gaza without the blight of having to rule over "another people" is to remove that "other people" from the territory over which it is obligated to rule. The only "non-kinetic" way to remove large-scale portions of the "other people" from that territory is by financially incentivized emigration.So, as unpalatable as it might be, Jerusalem will disregard this logic at its grave peril."
Is Disarming Hamas Israel's Best Policy? :: Middle East Quarterly (meforum.org)
Imagine, if it was Northern Ireland, the UK Govt proposing to move the entire Roman Catholic population of the province south into the Republic, having first bombed half of LondonDerry and Belfast into rubble.
Hmmm...so there are alternatives? Like talking? Power sharing? What hasn't been tried so far, in 100 years? And what did they have before that?
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Joshua Leiffer has a long read on Netanyahu in today's Guardian, and is one of the best I have read. For obvious reasons he doesn't address the other side of the question -what happens to the Palestinian Authority when this crisis is over? That said, the article is worth reading as it documents how Netanyahu effectively groomed Hamas believing it could be contained. His arrogance is breathtaking, as has been the failure of his 'security state' -it is going to be some time before Israel can find a way back to whatever being normal is, if it happens at all.
The Netanyahu doctrine: how Israel’s longest-serving leader reshaped the country in his image | Benjamin Netanyahu | The Guardian
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Dahlia Scheindlin has written one of the most sane pieces on the conflict, which can be compared with the hysterical rubbish otherwise on offer, such as Stephen Pollard's offensive drivel in today's Telegraph.
She charts the impasse into which Hamas and Israel fell, repeating a cycle of violence without end, but argues for sane alternatives, including the concept of a Confederation which I support, even though, as she also argues, these decades of indecision and violence often seem to close off real roads to peace and co-operation, though they remain the only positive end game.
Israelis and Palestinians can no longer avoid a fateful choice about their future | Dahlia Scheindlin | The Guardian
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
Putin on Ukraine:
"As the Russian assault on Ukraine has intensified, the Russian president and his government has escalated rhetoric falsely labeling the Ukrainian government and its leaders as “Nazis."
Why is Putin Calling the Ukrainian Government a Bunch of Nazis? | ADL
Israel's Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich:
"“There are 2 million Nazis in Judea and Samaria, who hate us exactly as do the Nazis of Hamas-ISIS in Gaza,”".
Smotrich defends boost in funds for settlers, saying they're used for security against 'Nazi' Palestinians | The Times of Israel
I would like to think that when the Gruesome Twosome have finished trying to destroy each other, reason make an entrance into the debate about 'what next?'. Smotrich, if there is any reason left in Israel, will lose his post as well as Neyanyahu when that day of reckoning comes to pass.
Right now, the release of hostages is welcome, but as the women and children are released, or some of the women, those adults who were in the military may be harder to release, so a lot depends on the pressure the US is putting on Israel, while one assumes Qatar is also putting pressure on HAMAS -eg, it could say 'either you release hostages or we throw you out of Qatar' -??
The sleep of Reason produces Monsters. Is anyone there awake right now?
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
-
Re: Israel: Turn Right for the Abyss
I followed the Guardian link below to this article on Israel, and it is interesting, if alarming. What the author fails to address is that in 1982 and in this latest episode, Israel's Prime Ministers were, and are Fascists. Menachem Begin's personal history is embedded in the Nationalist projects of Jabotinsky and Stern (he latter received his military training in a camp run by Mussolini's Fascists at Civitavecchia) , the Likud legacy that Netanyahu is heir to, and supports. The author thus has no time for the possibility that Israel has ever had an alternative to Nationalist violence which by definition denies the Palestinians rights or any kind, be the right to exist, or the right to political and equal representation of the kind we enjoy in Europe and North America.
He thus also tells us what Israel should do to give Palestinians the space in which to distance themselves from Hamas and the PA, to find a better alternative for themselves, but this is, yet again, an outsider telling Palestinians what decisions to make, never asking them to make the decisions on their own, which has been the fundamental insult to them since the British denied them the Statehood most other successors to Empire had after the First World War.
Israel is repeating the mistakes of the past because its present day leadership is like the one's that preceded it, but the most extreme even by Israel's low standards -until a paradigm shift creates an entirely new agenda that benefits Israelis and Palestinians, this mass murder, this addiction to violence will continue, ensuring there are no winners in this war, only losers.
The article is here-
Israel Could Lose (csis.org)
It was linked in this-
As the ceasefire ends, a question from history lingers: will Israel win the battle but lose the war against Hamas? | Israel-Hamas war | The Guardian