Did you catch The Australian taking a shot at its Mini-Me, The Australian Jewish News, recently? "It's always fun to see parochialism blossoming, so we salute The Australian Jewish News for the headline: 'Saint Mary [McKillop]'s Jewish connection'." (Strewth: She was a mensch, 1/3/10)
Parochialism? You bet, but there's more to the AJN than just parochialism. There's... beat-ups.
In its 19 March issue, for example, I came across the following rivetting headline: Anti-Semitism the 'worst form of racism' on campus
My God, thought I, our unis must be veritable cesspits of sulphuric anti-Semitism! Taking a deep breath, my heart beating wildly, I read on: "Anti-Israel sentiment is on the rise at universities and is being used as a disguise for anti-Semitism, according to the Australian Liberal Students Federation vice-president."
What a relief! It's not really anti-Semitism after all, but only anti-Israel sentiment being used as a disguise for anti-Semitism. And on very good authority too, that of a Young Lib.
The Young Lib is then quoted as saying, "I am very aware of the anti-Semitic views on campus and while I don't think it's extremely widespread, there are very small and vocal groups that are racially motivated..."
Hello? Anti-semitic views? What happened to the anti-Israel sentiment bit? Is the ground not shifting here? But then, whatever it is, anti-Semitism or anti-Israel sentiment being used as a disguise for anti-Semitism, it's hardly widespread. Which is reassuring. And those very small and vocal groups that are racially motivated? They may be noisy, but at least they're so small they can't even be named. More reassurance.
The Young Lib concluded by saying, "Anti-Israel bias that verges on anti-Semitism is the worst form of racism on university campuses..."
My God, thought I, she's all over the place! First it was anti-Israel sentiment being used as a disguise for anti-Semitism. Then it was the Real Enchilada, anti-Semitism. Now it's anti-Israel bias that verges on anti-Semitism. This particular Young Lib's obviously got a great future ahead of her in federal politics! And I'm so reassured (in terms of the overall quantity of racism on campus that is) that, although this anti-Israel sentiment being used as a disguise for anti-Semitism/anti-Semitism/anti-Israel bias verging on anti-Semitism - whatever - is barely detectable, exhaustive Young Lib polling shows that it's still worse than say anti-Muslim, anti-Asian, or anti-Indian racism. Every cloud has a silver lining, as they say.
Now far be it for me not to trust the Liberal Party and all who sail in her, especially your Young Libs, but I do have this irritating habit of wanting to see some sort of evidence for assertions such as the one trumpeted in the headline: Anti-Semitism the 'worst form of racism' on campus. Well, I'm pleased to say that the report didn't disappoint me on that score, citing the following conclusive data to back it up: "The latest incident noted was just a few weeks ago at the University of Sydney, where one student raised his arm and yelled 'Heil Hitler' during Israeli singer Ivri Lider's concert organised by the Australasian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS)."
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Zionism: On A Wing & A Prayer
In her tilt at Jewish peoplehood denier Shlomo Sand, Age/Australian Jewish News columnist Julie Szego does us all a great service by revealing that the Zionist version of Jewish history is nothing more than intuition, uncritical assumption and fruity mythology:
"I'm not going to bother with any thorough demolition of Sand's theory; that's the easy bit. Most of us intuitively know it's flawed. As Halkin elegantly argues in The New Republic, Jewish peoplehood has been taken for granted throughout history by both Jews and non-Jews alike. You can't read the Bible without acknowledging its nationalist themes, and whatever the truth about the Roman expulsion, the loss of Jewish sovereignty and political power was the real issue. Every nationalist movement requires a pinch of mythology, and the Jewish version has more zest and endurance than most." (Post-Zionism exposed, AJN, 19/3/10)
"I'm not going to bother with any thorough demolition of Sand's theory; that's the easy bit. Most of us intuitively know it's flawed. As Halkin elegantly argues in The New Republic, Jewish peoplehood has been taken for granted throughout history by both Jews and non-Jews alike. You can't read the Bible without acknowledging its nationalist themes, and whatever the truth about the Roman expulsion, the loss of Jewish sovereignty and political power was the real issue. Every nationalist movement requires a pinch of mythology, and the Jewish version has more zest and endurance than most." (Post-Zionism exposed, AJN, 19/3/10)
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Our Most Serious Foreign Affairs Analyst
Australia's most serious foreign affairs analyst holds forth on the current state of US-Israeli relations:
"Accompanying Obama's own actions has been some of the most dangerous rhetoric ever to come out of a US administration, to the effect that Israeli intransigence endangers US troops by inflaming extremists in the Arab world. No serious analyst anywhere believes that Israel is an important source of the conflicts in Afghanistan or Iraq. Using this type of argument comes dangerously close to the administration licensing a mutant strain of anti-Semitism - it's all the Jews fault." (Obama's anti-Israeli hysteria dangerous and destructive, Greg Sheridan, The Australian, 27/3/10)
The dangerous, almost anti-Semitic, rhetoric that our most serious of analysts darkly alludes to comes from US Central Command chief General David Petraeus, who, despite his daily immersion in the heat and dust, both literal and metaphorical, of the Middle East, simply cannot be taken seriously:
"On January 16... a team of senior military officers from CENTCOM (responsible for overseeing American security interests in the Middle East), arrived at the Pentagon to brief Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The team had been dispatched by CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus to underline his growing worries in the lack of progress in resolving the issue. The 33-slide, 45' PowerPoint briefing stunned Mullen. The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the US was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM's mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing US standing in the region, and that Mitchell himself was (as a senior pentagon officer later bluntly described it) 'too old, too slow... and too late'. The... briefing was unprecedented. No previous CENTCOM commander had ever expressed himself on what is essentially a political issue; which is why the briefers were careful to tell Mullen that their conclusions followed from a December 2009 tour of the region where, on Petraeus' instructions, they spoke to senior Arab leaders. 'Everywhere they went, the message was pretty humbling', a Pentagon officer familiar with the briefing says. 'America was not only viewed as weak, but its military posture in the region was eroding'. But Petraeus wasn't finished: 2 days after the Mullen briefing, Petraeus sent a paper to the White House requesting that the West Bank and Gaza (which, with Israel, is a part of the European Command - or EUCOM), be made a part of his area of operations. Petraeus' reason was straightforward: with US troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US military had to be perceived by Arab leaders as engaged in the region's most troublesome conflict." (From Foreign Policy, quoted in 'This is starting to get dangerous', Scott Horton, informationclearinghouse.info, 15/3/10)
And not only is Petraeus' analysis - sorry, rhetoric - not to be taken seriously, we can't take the analysis/rhetoric of everybody's favourite extremist Osama bin Laden seriously either:
"The suffering of the Lebanese and Palestinian peoples is seen by bin Laden as a result of the creation of the state of Israel with Western support. The notion of revenge is central to bin Laden's thinking: 'The events that made a direct impression on me were during and after 1982, when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon... I still remember those distressing scenes: blood, torn limbs, women and children massacred... The whole world heard and saw what happened, but did nothing. In those critical moments, many ideas raged inside me, ideas difficult to describe, but they unleashed a powerful urge to reject injustice and a strong determination to punish the aggressors'. Bin Laden regards the Zionist enterprise as an anachronistic extension of European colonization into the modern age. Since bin Laden's words were censored in the US in the aftermath of 9/11, there was little or no reporting at the time of his claim that the attacks were a culmination of an 80-year struggle; that the action was to avenge 'our people killed in Palestine'; that it was Palestine 'which has sunk under military occupation for more than 80 years' (some commentators have assumed that bin Laden was referring to the abolition of the Caliphate in 1924); that 'the creation and continuation of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you - the United States - are the leaders of its criminals'; and finally that there was 'no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel'." (False Prophets: The 'Clash of Civilizations' & the Global War on Terror, Richard Bonney, 2008, p 27)
No, whether it's those who are battling the extremists or the extremists themselves, nothing they say, as our most serious foreign affairs analyst says, can be taken seriously.
Seriously now, truly serious people who require a serious analysis of the Middle East conflict need go no further than that of Greg (Jerusalem Prize) Sheridan, foreign editor of our most serious newspaper, The Australian.
"Accompanying Obama's own actions has been some of the most dangerous rhetoric ever to come out of a US administration, to the effect that Israeli intransigence endangers US troops by inflaming extremists in the Arab world. No serious analyst anywhere believes that Israel is an important source of the conflicts in Afghanistan or Iraq. Using this type of argument comes dangerously close to the administration licensing a mutant strain of anti-Semitism - it's all the Jews fault." (Obama's anti-Israeli hysteria dangerous and destructive, Greg Sheridan, The Australian, 27/3/10)
The dangerous, almost anti-Semitic, rhetoric that our most serious of analysts darkly alludes to comes from US Central Command chief General David Petraeus, who, despite his daily immersion in the heat and dust, both literal and metaphorical, of the Middle East, simply cannot be taken seriously:
"On January 16... a team of senior military officers from CENTCOM (responsible for overseeing American security interests in the Middle East), arrived at the Pentagon to brief Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The team had been dispatched by CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus to underline his growing worries in the lack of progress in resolving the issue. The 33-slide, 45' PowerPoint briefing stunned Mullen. The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the US was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM's mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing US standing in the region, and that Mitchell himself was (as a senior pentagon officer later bluntly described it) 'too old, too slow... and too late'. The... briefing was unprecedented. No previous CENTCOM commander had ever expressed himself on what is essentially a political issue; which is why the briefers were careful to tell Mullen that their conclusions followed from a December 2009 tour of the region where, on Petraeus' instructions, they spoke to senior Arab leaders. 'Everywhere they went, the message was pretty humbling', a Pentagon officer familiar with the briefing says. 'America was not only viewed as weak, but its military posture in the region was eroding'. But Petraeus wasn't finished: 2 days after the Mullen briefing, Petraeus sent a paper to the White House requesting that the West Bank and Gaza (which, with Israel, is a part of the European Command - or EUCOM), be made a part of his area of operations. Petraeus' reason was straightforward: with US troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US military had to be perceived by Arab leaders as engaged in the region's most troublesome conflict." (From Foreign Policy, quoted in 'This is starting to get dangerous', Scott Horton, informationclearinghouse.info, 15/3/10)
And not only is Petraeus' analysis - sorry, rhetoric - not to be taken seriously, we can't take the analysis/rhetoric of everybody's favourite extremist Osama bin Laden seriously either:
"The suffering of the Lebanese and Palestinian peoples is seen by bin Laden as a result of the creation of the state of Israel with Western support. The notion of revenge is central to bin Laden's thinking: 'The events that made a direct impression on me were during and after 1982, when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon... I still remember those distressing scenes: blood, torn limbs, women and children massacred... The whole world heard and saw what happened, but did nothing. In those critical moments, many ideas raged inside me, ideas difficult to describe, but they unleashed a powerful urge to reject injustice and a strong determination to punish the aggressors'. Bin Laden regards the Zionist enterprise as an anachronistic extension of European colonization into the modern age. Since bin Laden's words were censored in the US in the aftermath of 9/11, there was little or no reporting at the time of his claim that the attacks were a culmination of an 80-year struggle; that the action was to avenge 'our people killed in Palestine'; that it was Palestine 'which has sunk under military occupation for more than 80 years' (some commentators have assumed that bin Laden was referring to the abolition of the Caliphate in 1924); that 'the creation and continuation of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you - the United States - are the leaders of its criminals'; and finally that there was 'no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel'." (False Prophets: The 'Clash of Civilizations' & the Global War on Terror, Richard Bonney, 2008, p 27)
No, whether it's those who are battling the extremists or the extremists themselves, nothing they say, as our most serious foreign affairs analyst says, can be taken seriously.
Seriously now, truly serious people who require a serious analysis of the Middle East conflict need go no further than that of Greg (Jerusalem Prize) Sheridan, foreign editor of our most serious newspaper, The Australian.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Praise Herzl & Pass the Talking Points
The Netanyahu government's finger (over Jerusalem, and whatever else takes its fancy) and the antics of Israel's photogenic death squads have ensured that what passes for the Pariah State's reputation has lately been taking more and more hits. It's therefore damage-control time and our Likudniks in the federal opposition and the Murdoch press have been summoned to do their bit. Praise Herzl and pass the talking points:
"Tony Abbott has called on the Rudd government not to expel an Israeli diplomat over allegations the Israeli secret service, Mossad, used forged Australian passports in the assassination of a Hamas terrorist in Dubai... 'We can never forget that Israel is a country under existential threat in a way Australians find difficult to understand', Mr Abbott told The Weekend Australian. It's also the only pluralist democracy in the Middle East. We have to understand that Israel sometimes has to do something which mercifully other countries are spared the necessity of doing. It strikes me that it would be an overreaction to expel an Israeli diplomat'." (Abbott calls for restraint on Israel, Greg Sheridan, The Australian, 27/3/10)
There but for the grace of God go we, eh Tony?
"Opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Julie Bishop told The WA: 'It would be naive in the extreme to believe a foreign power never used a forged passport. The Australian government would have to be very careful to ensure that Australian agencies never used false passports'. She said expelling an Israeli diplomat would be an 'extreme step' and that she would 'not want to see Kevin Rudd politicise this case in an election year'."
Everybody's doin' it, doin' it, doin' it, everybody's doin' it - even us, eh Jules? Wouldn't want to be hypocrites now. Confirms Sheridan, "Reliable sources have also told The WA that Australian intelligence agencies used forged passports in their clandestine work." So there!
Seriously though, must I remind the Abbott and the Bishop that John Howard expelled Israeli 'diplomat' Amir Lati in December 2004 "after ASIO concerns about his pattern of dating high-profile public servants with access to classified information" (Israeli 'victim of ASIO spy row', John Kerin, The Australian, 10/3/05)? Funny, I don't remember any special pleading by the Abbott and the Bishop at the time.
And on the other side of the fence? "Well-informed sources told The WA that the Rudd government was having a vigorous internal debate about what action, if any, to take. Some members of the government believe that it has already done enough to vent its anger with the Israelis... Others... prefer aligning more with the Gordon Brown strategy and with Mr Obama's evident anger toward Israel."
As "the most influential foreign affairs analyst in Australia" (or so says The Australian's website), Greg (Jerusalem Prize) Sheridan's views will no doubt figure prominently in the government's vigorous internal debate over whether to give Amir Lati's successor his marching orders. That being the case, I won't be holding my breath, because, as the sage says, "The Americans and Brits don't always get things right. There are times when Canberra should definitely not follow their lead."
You see, Sheridan reckons that Obama's in "full jihad mode against Israel," is responsible for "some of the most dangerous rhetoric ever to come out of a US administration," and is unleashing "the spectre of wild and hysterical anti-Israel sentiment... with all manner of destructive consequences." (Obama's anti-Israeli hysteria dangerous and destructive, 27/3/10)
And we can't have our Prime Minister tailing a mad jihadi like Obama now, can we?
"Tony Abbott has called on the Rudd government not to expel an Israeli diplomat over allegations the Israeli secret service, Mossad, used forged Australian passports in the assassination of a Hamas terrorist in Dubai... 'We can never forget that Israel is a country under existential threat in a way Australians find difficult to understand', Mr Abbott told The Weekend Australian. It's also the only pluralist democracy in the Middle East. We have to understand that Israel sometimes has to do something which mercifully other countries are spared the necessity of doing. It strikes me that it would be an overreaction to expel an Israeli diplomat'." (Abbott calls for restraint on Israel, Greg Sheridan, The Australian, 27/3/10)
There but for the grace of God go we, eh Tony?
"Opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Julie Bishop told The WA: 'It would be naive in the extreme to believe a foreign power never used a forged passport. The Australian government would have to be very careful to ensure that Australian agencies never used false passports'. She said expelling an Israeli diplomat would be an 'extreme step' and that she would 'not want to see Kevin Rudd politicise this case in an election year'."
Everybody's doin' it, doin' it, doin' it, everybody's doin' it - even us, eh Jules? Wouldn't want to be hypocrites now. Confirms Sheridan, "Reliable sources have also told The WA that Australian intelligence agencies used forged passports in their clandestine work." So there!
Seriously though, must I remind the Abbott and the Bishop that John Howard expelled Israeli 'diplomat' Amir Lati in December 2004 "after ASIO concerns about his pattern of dating high-profile public servants with access to classified information" (Israeli 'victim of ASIO spy row', John Kerin, The Australian, 10/3/05)? Funny, I don't remember any special pleading by the Abbott and the Bishop at the time.
And on the other side of the fence? "Well-informed sources told The WA that the Rudd government was having a vigorous internal debate about what action, if any, to take. Some members of the government believe that it has already done enough to vent its anger with the Israelis... Others... prefer aligning more with the Gordon Brown strategy and with Mr Obama's evident anger toward Israel."
As "the most influential foreign affairs analyst in Australia" (or so says The Australian's website), Greg (Jerusalem Prize) Sheridan's views will no doubt figure prominently in the government's vigorous internal debate over whether to give Amir Lati's successor his marching orders. That being the case, I won't be holding my breath, because, as the sage says, "The Americans and Brits don't always get things right. There are times when Canberra should definitely not follow their lead."
You see, Sheridan reckons that Obama's in "full jihad mode against Israel," is responsible for "some of the most dangerous rhetoric ever to come out of a US administration," and is unleashing "the spectre of wild and hysterical anti-Israel sentiment... with all manner of destructive consequences." (Obama's anti-Israeli hysteria dangerous and destructive, 27/3/10)
And we can't have our Prime Minister tailing a mad jihadi like Obama now, can we?
Up To Our Necks
It was The Australian's foreign editor Greg (Jerusalem Prize) Sheridan who first alerted us to the fact that Australian and Israeli intelligence were, ahem, more than just good friends: "Canberra has a very close, active and intimate relationship with Israel. Many of our top people go there for consultations and even for special short course training." (Theft burned a strong supporter, 26/2/10)
Now, on Radio National's excellent Rear Vision program, Israeli intelligence expert and Haaretz journalist Yossi Melman lifts the lid on their obscene congress:
Yossi Melman: ... A third role [of Mossad] was to maintain secret, clandestine but very vital and useful contacts with its counterparts, whether it's... ASIO or... the CIA or... M16... And they have developed over the years very, very intimate relations, sharing information and... assessments and even, nowadays, going into the field, enjoying the operations in the war against global terrorism... [Such 'friendly organisations'] meet once in a while... they send envoys to each other's countries. There is an Australian ASIO delegate here, or envoy or resident if you wish, working [both] for the Israeli Embassy and for the Australian Embassy in Tel Aviv, and there is a Mossad agent or representative working from the Israeli Embassy... in Australia. And so on and so forth around the globe. So on the one hand there is very good, intimate, strong co-operation between the security services, and they are doing each other favours ocassionally, not only sharing information but also Scratch my back [&] and I'll scratch yours, Do me a favour [&] and I'll do you a favour, and these favours can vary from Can you lend me your agent? or I'm running an agent in country A, can I join you in running that agent? Sometimes it's to provide documentation: We need you to provide us with a cover because we are working a clandestine [operation] in country B and we can't operate in this country, while your... passports [&] travel documents are more welcome [there]. And then we come to that rough [sic: grey] area in which you co-operate... but... don't tell the other organisation all your secrets... And because of that ocassionally the Mossad, which is using other identities [&] nationalities, finds itself in troubling [sic: hot] water, as was the case in Dubai." (The Mossad, 24/3/10)
Now, on Radio National's excellent Rear Vision program, Israeli intelligence expert and Haaretz journalist Yossi Melman lifts the lid on their obscene congress:
Yossi Melman: ... A third role [of Mossad] was to maintain secret, clandestine but very vital and useful contacts with its counterparts, whether it's... ASIO or... the CIA or... M16... And they have developed over the years very, very intimate relations, sharing information and... assessments and even, nowadays, going into the field, enjoying the operations in the war against global terrorism... [Such 'friendly organisations'] meet once in a while... they send envoys to each other's countries. There is an Australian ASIO delegate here, or envoy or resident if you wish, working [both] for the Israeli Embassy and for the Australian Embassy in Tel Aviv, and there is a Mossad agent or representative working from the Israeli Embassy... in Australia. And so on and so forth around the globe. So on the one hand there is very good, intimate, strong co-operation between the security services, and they are doing each other favours ocassionally, not only sharing information but also Scratch my back [&] and I'll scratch yours, Do me a favour [&] and I'll do you a favour, and these favours can vary from Can you lend me your agent? or I'm running an agent in country A, can I join you in running that agent? Sometimes it's to provide documentation: We need you to provide us with a cover because we are working a clandestine [operation] in country B and we can't operate in this country, while your... passports [&] travel documents are more welcome [there]. And then we come to that rough [sic: grey] area in which you co-operate... but... don't tell the other organisation all your secrets... And because of that ocassionally the Mossad, which is using other identities [&] nationalities, finds itself in troubling [sic: hot] water, as was the case in Dubai." (The Mossad, 24/3/10)
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Putting the Slipper In At the Herald
As the murder of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh continues to reverberate, the penny is ever so slowly starting to drop at the Sydney Morning Herald. Journalist Hamish McDonald ventures a rare criticism - well, sort of - of Israel, its local lobbyists and their dupes in Canberra:
"The coolness didn't last long... [O]ur politicians find it hard to maintain any indignation, let alone anger or rage, against Israel." (True friends must tell the truth, 20/3/10)
Labor MP Julia Irwin, who launched a devastating attack on union leader and fan of Israeli death squads Paul Howes in the House of Representatives on March 15, is virtually the only exception to this depressing truth.
"This week the Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, was buttering up Israel and its local lobbyists again, by staging a special press conference and media opportunity at Parliament House to 'receive' a written report and set of recommendations on boosting relations. This was handed over by Albert Dadon, the new mover and shaker in Australia's Jewish community, on behalf of the Australia Israel Leadership Forum, a second-track diplomacy venture started two years ago on the model of businessman Phil Scanlan's longer-running Australia America Leadership Dialogue... The Israeli forum seems already to be well into the uncritical boosterism of which Scanlan's group gets accused in some circles. It has chosen this time to suggest that, along with more trade, agricultural and scientific exchanges and so on, Australia develops military-to-military ties with Israel.* Smith said he was 'very happy' to receive this report, which would get 'serious consideration' from the Prime Minister, adding: 'The friendship between Australia and Israel is longstanding and it is enduring, and that will continue. Despite recent events, which have been the cause of public commentary between Australia and Israel, that friendship will endure'. The, ahem, recent events include the use of forged copies of Australian passports in the recent assassination of a Hamas leader in Dubai, and the 'insulting' (US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's word) action of Benjamin Netanyahu's government in announcing more Jewish housing in disputed [!!!] East Jerusalem as the US Vice-President, Joe Biden, arrived in Israel and US-brokered 'proximity talks' between Israel and the Palestinians were about to start. Australian Federal Police agents have been to Israel to inquire about the passports, and ASIO has been put on the case too. But no-one is expecting the AFP to find a link to Mossad, unless the Israeli intelligence agency has been very careless indeed. Some longer coolness about East Jerusalem would have been in order. Netanyahu, who included a smarmy letter in Dadon's report, has been trying to weasel his way out of the row with Washington by blaming the timing, but not the substance, on his interior minister and the Jerusalem mayor. Australia's rebuke was mildly worded. 'I share the view that this is a bad decision at the wrong time and it's not a helpful contribution to the peace process', Smith said, adding that Israel was undoing the 'very hard work' of the US and others to get the two sides working towards a 'two-state' solution... Behind its profession of undying support for Israel, the Rudd government has put a bit more detachment into our policy, ending our previous lining up with a bunch of tiny American client states in UN votes on the Middle East... It doesn't seem to be having any impact on Netanyahu and has opened Rudd to opposition sniping that he's selling out Israel to win Arab votes for the UN Security Council seat. Both sides of our politics could do well to adopt the Rudd-Confucian doctrine of the 'zhengyou', the 'true friend' (in Chinese) who can point out shortcomings."
OK, I know this is hardly Meirsheimer/Walt standard but maybe we can at least agree that it's a start.
[*See my 19/3/10 post Crazy Love]
"The coolness didn't last long... [O]ur politicians find it hard to maintain any indignation, let alone anger or rage, against Israel." (True friends must tell the truth, 20/3/10)
Labor MP Julia Irwin, who launched a devastating attack on union leader and fan of Israeli death squads Paul Howes in the House of Representatives on March 15, is virtually the only exception to this depressing truth.
"This week the Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, was buttering up Israel and its local lobbyists again, by staging a special press conference and media opportunity at Parliament House to 'receive' a written report and set of recommendations on boosting relations. This was handed over by Albert Dadon, the new mover and shaker in Australia's Jewish community, on behalf of the Australia Israel Leadership Forum, a second-track diplomacy venture started two years ago on the model of businessman Phil Scanlan's longer-running Australia America Leadership Dialogue... The Israeli forum seems already to be well into the uncritical boosterism of which Scanlan's group gets accused in some circles. It has chosen this time to suggest that, along with more trade, agricultural and scientific exchanges and so on, Australia develops military-to-military ties with Israel.* Smith said he was 'very happy' to receive this report, which would get 'serious consideration' from the Prime Minister, adding: 'The friendship between Australia and Israel is longstanding and it is enduring, and that will continue. Despite recent events, which have been the cause of public commentary between Australia and Israel, that friendship will endure'. The, ahem, recent events include the use of forged copies of Australian passports in the recent assassination of a Hamas leader in Dubai, and the 'insulting' (US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's word) action of Benjamin Netanyahu's government in announcing more Jewish housing in disputed [!!!] East Jerusalem as the US Vice-President, Joe Biden, arrived in Israel and US-brokered 'proximity talks' between Israel and the Palestinians were about to start. Australian Federal Police agents have been to Israel to inquire about the passports, and ASIO has been put on the case too. But no-one is expecting the AFP to find a link to Mossad, unless the Israeli intelligence agency has been very careless indeed. Some longer coolness about East Jerusalem would have been in order. Netanyahu, who included a smarmy letter in Dadon's report, has been trying to weasel his way out of the row with Washington by blaming the timing, but not the substance, on his interior minister and the Jerusalem mayor. Australia's rebuke was mildly worded. 'I share the view that this is a bad decision at the wrong time and it's not a helpful contribution to the peace process', Smith said, adding that Israel was undoing the 'very hard work' of the US and others to get the two sides working towards a 'two-state' solution... Behind its profession of undying support for Israel, the Rudd government has put a bit more detachment into our policy, ending our previous lining up with a bunch of tiny American client states in UN votes on the Middle East... It doesn't seem to be having any impact on Netanyahu and has opened Rudd to opposition sniping that he's selling out Israel to win Arab votes for the UN Security Council seat. Both sides of our politics could do well to adopt the Rudd-Confucian doctrine of the 'zhengyou', the 'true friend' (in Chinese) who can point out shortcomings."
OK, I know this is hardly Meirsheimer/Walt standard but maybe we can at least agree that it's a start.
[*See my 19/3/10 post Crazy Love]
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Enabling Israel
"It's a given that the long-suffering wife, who allows her drunken, philandering man back through the door bearing roses and apologies, will suffer again. Because while she might feel she's doing the right thing, she's sending him the wrong message. Namely, that he can do that and be forgiven. We all know to err is human, to forgive divine. But some acts of forgiveness aren't appropriate. They're the ones people who know about these things refer to as 'enabling'." (Forgiving bad behaviour absolves us of responsibility, Jeremy Bass, Sydney Morning Herald, 17/3/10)
"Actually, Joe [Biden] set himself up. From the moment he set foot on Israeli soil, our vice president was in full pander mode. First he headed to Yad Vashem memorial, where he put on a yarmulke and declared Israel 'a central bolt in our existence'. 'For world Jewry', Joe went on, presumably including 5 million Americans, 'Israel is the heart... Israel is the light... Israel is the hope'. Meeting Shimon Peres the next day, Joe confessed that when he first visited at age 29, 'Israel captured my heart'. In Peres' guestbook, he wrote, 'The bond between our two nations has been and remains unshakable'. He then told Peres and the world, 'There is absolutely no space between the United States and Israel when it comes to Israel's security'. As Peres spoke, Biden took notes. When Peres called him 'a friend', Joe gushed, 'It's good to be home'. Even at AIPAC they must have been gagging.
"Walking around the corner to Prime Minister Netanyahu's office, Joe called him by his nickname, 'Bibi', declared him a 'real' friend, and said the US relationship with Israel 'has been and will continue to be the centrepiece of our policy'. Then the sandbag hit. Interior Minister Eli Yishai announced construction of 1,600 new apartments in Arab East Jerusalem. Stunned and humiliated, Biden issued a statement saying he 'condemned' the decision. He then retaliated by coming late to dinner at Bibi's house.
"Netanyahu has apologized for the timing, but they are going ahead with the apartments. What are the Americans going to do about it? At this point, nothing but bluster. Indeed, a day later, at Tel Aviv University, Joe was back at it: '[T]he US has no better friend... than Israel'. On his departure for Jordan, Haaretz reported that Israel plans to build 50,000 new homes in East Jerusalem over the next few years.
"Biden may feel he was played for a fool, and Americans may feel jilted, but we got what grovelers deserve. And if we wish to understand why the Arabs who once respected us now seem contemptuous of us, consider that battered-spouse response to a public slap across the face. Consider also the most remarkable statement of Biden's first 24 hours. 'Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the United States and Israel'. Biden is saying we are a more effective force for Mideast peace in a region where Arabs outnumber Israelis 50 to one if everyone knows we sing from the same song sheet as Israel and have no policy independent of Israel's. How can America be seen as an honest broker between Arabs and Israelis if there is no 'space' between America and Israel?
"Even with the closest ally in our history, Britain in World War II, there was space between Winston Churchill and FDR on where to invade - North Africa, Italy, France, the Balkans? - whether to beat Stalin to Berlin, Prague, and Vienna, who should be supreme allied commander, even whether the British Empire should survive. Israel keeps its our own interests foremost in mind, and when these dictate actions inimical to US interests, Israel acts unilaterally. David Ben- Gurion did not seek Dwight Eisenhower's permission to attack Egypt in collusion with the French and British in 1956, enraging Ike. Israel did not consult JFK on whether it could steal enriched uranium from the NUMEC plant in Pennsylvania for its atom bomb program. Israel did not consult us on whether it could attack the USS Liberty in the Six-Day War, or suborn Jonathan Pollard to loot our security secrets, or transfer our weapons technology to China. They went ahead and did it, knowing the Americans would swallow hard and take it. Ehud Olmert did not consult President-elect Obama on whether to launch a war on Gaza and kill 1,400 Palestinians. Nor did Netanyahu consult us before Mossad took down the Hamas leader in Dubai.
"What Netanyahu and Yishai are telling Obama with their decision to keep building on occupied land is, when it comes to East Jerusalem and the West Bank, we decide, not you. And if Netanyahu has jolted Joe and others out of their romantic reveries about Israel, good. At least now we no longer see as through a glass darkly. Israeli and US interests often run parallel, but they are not the same. Israel is concerned with a neighbourhood. We are concerned with a world of 300 million Arabs and a billion Muslims. Our policies cannot be the same. If they are, we will end up with all of Israel's enemies, who are legion, and only Israel's friends, who are few. And if our policy and Israel's are one and the same, the Arab perception will be what it is today - that America cannot stand up to Israel, even when her national interests command it. Joe's performance before he got the wet mitten across the face only underscored the point: The mighty superpower is a poodle of Israel." The poodle gets kicked, Patrick Buchanan, antiwar.com, 15/3/10)
"Actually, Joe [Biden] set himself up. From the moment he set foot on Israeli soil, our vice president was in full pander mode. First he headed to Yad Vashem memorial, where he put on a yarmulke and declared Israel 'a central bolt in our existence'. 'For world Jewry', Joe went on, presumably including 5 million Americans, 'Israel is the heart... Israel is the light... Israel is the hope'. Meeting Shimon Peres the next day, Joe confessed that when he first visited at age 29, 'Israel captured my heart'. In Peres' guestbook, he wrote, 'The bond between our two nations has been and remains unshakable'. He then told Peres and the world, 'There is absolutely no space between the United States and Israel when it comes to Israel's security'. As Peres spoke, Biden took notes. When Peres called him 'a friend', Joe gushed, 'It's good to be home'. Even at AIPAC they must have been gagging.
"Walking around the corner to Prime Minister Netanyahu's office, Joe called him by his nickname, 'Bibi', declared him a 'real' friend, and said the US relationship with Israel 'has been and will continue to be the centrepiece of our policy'. Then the sandbag hit. Interior Minister Eli Yishai announced construction of 1,600 new apartments in Arab East Jerusalem. Stunned and humiliated, Biden issued a statement saying he 'condemned' the decision. He then retaliated by coming late to dinner at Bibi's house.
"Netanyahu has apologized for the timing, but they are going ahead with the apartments. What are the Americans going to do about it? At this point, nothing but bluster. Indeed, a day later, at Tel Aviv University, Joe was back at it: '[T]he US has no better friend... than Israel'. On his departure for Jordan, Haaretz reported that Israel plans to build 50,000 new homes in East Jerusalem over the next few years.
"Biden may feel he was played for a fool, and Americans may feel jilted, but we got what grovelers deserve. And if we wish to understand why the Arabs who once respected us now seem contemptuous of us, consider that battered-spouse response to a public slap across the face. Consider also the most remarkable statement of Biden's first 24 hours. 'Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the United States and Israel'. Biden is saying we are a more effective force for Mideast peace in a region where Arabs outnumber Israelis 50 to one if everyone knows we sing from the same song sheet as Israel and have no policy independent of Israel's. How can America be seen as an honest broker between Arabs and Israelis if there is no 'space' between America and Israel?
"Even with the closest ally in our history, Britain in World War II, there was space between Winston Churchill and FDR on where to invade - North Africa, Italy, France, the Balkans? - whether to beat Stalin to Berlin, Prague, and Vienna, who should be supreme allied commander, even whether the British Empire should survive. Israel keeps its our own interests foremost in mind, and when these dictate actions inimical to US interests, Israel acts unilaterally. David Ben- Gurion did not seek Dwight Eisenhower's permission to attack Egypt in collusion with the French and British in 1956, enraging Ike. Israel did not consult JFK on whether it could steal enriched uranium from the NUMEC plant in Pennsylvania for its atom bomb program. Israel did not consult us on whether it could attack the USS Liberty in the Six-Day War, or suborn Jonathan Pollard to loot our security secrets, or transfer our weapons technology to China. They went ahead and did it, knowing the Americans would swallow hard and take it. Ehud Olmert did not consult President-elect Obama on whether to launch a war on Gaza and kill 1,400 Palestinians. Nor did Netanyahu consult us before Mossad took down the Hamas leader in Dubai.
"What Netanyahu and Yishai are telling Obama with their decision to keep building on occupied land is, when it comes to East Jerusalem and the West Bank, we decide, not you. And if Netanyahu has jolted Joe and others out of their romantic reveries about Israel, good. At least now we no longer see as through a glass darkly. Israeli and US interests often run parallel, but they are not the same. Israel is concerned with a neighbourhood. We are concerned with a world of 300 million Arabs and a billion Muslims. Our policies cannot be the same. If they are, we will end up with all of Israel's enemies, who are legion, and only Israel's friends, who are few. And if our policy and Israel's are one and the same, the Arab perception will be what it is today - that America cannot stand up to Israel, even when her national interests command it. Joe's performance before he got the wet mitten across the face only underscored the point: The mighty superpower is a poodle of Israel." The poodle gets kicked, Patrick Buchanan, antiwar.com, 15/3/10)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)