Thomas Friedman, in today's 4th installment of his 5-part series on reforming the Arab world, writes:
Let's not mince words. American policy today toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is insane.
As in previous columns, the heart of the problem in Friedman's view is religiously-inspired Jews who settle in occupied territories, reinforced by Christian fundamentalists in the US, conservative Jews, and an indifferent American administration. He concedes that Palestinians are also in the grip of collective madness, but that seems less serious than Israeli settlements. The Jews are in the way. They cause international confusion and chaos. They must withdraw immediately from the West Bank and Gaza in order to stifle anti-Semitism and to give a chance to the development of Arab/Muslim liberalism and democracy. Friedman admits that such actions will not assure the ascendance of humanity among Arabs or Muslims, but Jewish deference (and American actions to force what is necessary) are his minimum necessary conditions. Without such withdrawals, Israel, the Middle East, the United States and the world will continue to suffer, and Israel may expire.Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 18, 2004 11:56 AM
Friedman fails to sense the essential humanness in Israeli settlements. They threaten an Arab society that urges killing with the loss of property. Isn't this a decent response to murder? If the Palestinians stop the killing, they can have a state on the land that remains. The sooner they stop the killing, the larger will be their state. If they do not stop the killing, there will be no Palestine.
Friedman also fails to see that the demographic threat of increasing population does not threaten Israel as much as it threatens Palestine. The babies born today will be choked by overburdened services and unemployment in a small and shrinking country. The best advice is for parents and spouses to stop urging suicide for the sake of Palestine and Islam.
No less depressing this morning than Friedman's column is the story of the artwork in Stockholm, and the loss of temper by the Israeli ambassador to Sweden. He trashed an exhibit done by an Israeli Jewish expatriate, which seems to have glorified Palestinian suicide as a way of bringing justice to the Middle East. We've already seen too many times the tape of the confrontation between the diplomat and the museum director. The diplomat protests a work of art that appears to justify the killing of Jews, while the museum director condemns him for undiplomatic behavior and destroying a work of art. I fear we will hear much more about this in the week to come unless a greater disaster competes for air time.
Friedman's column is too similar to the exhibition in Stockholm. Jewish presence in a disputed land, and Jewish efforts to limit barbarism have driven both the Jewish columnist and the Jewish artist beyond reason to the fringes of madness.
Acceptance of Friedman's proposal will not stop Palestinians from killing Jews. Even a casual listener knows that what Hamas and other Palestinians mean when they talk about the occupation is the entirety of Israel. Removing the settlements would be considered just another step toward their goal of destroying Israel. It would be considered a sign of weakness suggesting it is time to rachet up the violence not end it. The destruction of Hamas and similar groups would be much more likely to create a chance for peace.
Posted by: Merv Benson on January 18, 2004 01:12 PMI could not agree more
http://davidmarks.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_davidmarks_archive.html#107440674770238409
Posted by: David Marks on January 18, 2004 01:22 PMOne million Arabs live in Israel but Jews in Judea are a 'barrier to peace'?
Why?
Was it because 750,000 Arabs that left to allow professional Arab armies to genocidally eliminate the new Jewish state in '48 are UN-approved-life-time-status "refugees"?
Was it because that genocidal war was lost resulting in 800,000 Jews being ethnically cleansed from the middle-east fled to Israel?
They weren't refugees right?
Posted by: DANEgerus on January 18, 2004 01:31 PMMeanwhile in reality read this story, which is great news. And note that even though the leader of the 'settlement movement' and so-called "hard-nosed" Likud leader speaks withdrawing and waiting for a Palestinian leader to make peace with, it doesn't matter, the problem even to morons like Friedman is the ""settlements"", or was it that his last column took a more pro-Israeli or American stance and now he had to ""balance"" that for his PC image.
Clinton blamed Arafat for failure - Cheney
Janine Zacharia Jan. 16, 2004
On US President George W. Bush's Inauguration Day in 2001, outgoing president Bill Clinton "talked repeatedly all day long about his disappointment in [Palestinian Authority Chairman] Yasser Arafat, how Arafat had, in effect, torpedoed the peace process," Vice President Dick Cheney said on Wednesday.
Clinton blamed Arafat several times for the failure of the 2000 peace negotiations at Camp David and for the collapse of the peace process. Cheney's description of Inauguration Day illustrated how prominent Arafat's contribution to the failed talks was in the outgoing president's mind during his last moments in office.
During a question-and-answer period following a speech in Los Angeles, Cheney expressed little hope of advancement in the peace process in the immediate term. "There has to be a way found to end terrorism emerging from the Palestinian areas into the Israeli areas. We had another four deaths just within the last 24 hours in Gaza, with a suicide bomber. And until the Palestinians have an organization, a government in place that's capable of dealing effectively with the structure of terror, I don't think significant progress is likely," Cheney said.
Asked about prospects for more active US involvement in the mediation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Cheney said the administration has concluded that no progress can be made in resolving the dispute so long as Arafat is in control of the Palestinian Authority. "The difficulty we have – and it is a continuing problem – is that after years of effort, it's become clear that as long as Yasser Arafat is the interlocutor on behalf of the Palestinians, as long as he is in control, we think any serious progress is virtually impossible," Cheney said.
Leave it to Friedman to try and do more damage to Israel right when it appears even that the State Department understands what most left of center centrists, Klein Halevi etc... in Israel understand.... that Israel is doing what it must and can't unilaterally withdraw, that is fucking insane hari kari. But leave it to Friedman and his clan of "know it all" know nothings.
Posted by: Mike on January 18, 2004 07:34 PMThe trouble with 'public art' is that it's a one-way communication: artist inflicts work on public, which must meekly accept it no matter how revolting. As with Stalinist decrees and pre-blog issues of the New York Times, there's no opportunity or public channel to respond. Expressions of anguish or outrage at the art are brushed off with contempt as philistinism, no matter how worthy the work of those sentiments.
The Israeli ambassador has replied on a national scale to the material expression of a despicable sentiment: glorification of a political murderer. We should honor him. And would that the ordinary citizen anywhere had the power to respond in some public manner to the works of public 'art' that express, however disguised or coded, such beastly concepts.
Off topic, but let the record show, that some posts down i "bursted" the dean bubble by pointing out that his huge meetings were not for real, nearly all the attendees were odd looking guys desperately trolling for "action" from females. They had no idea what they were doing, and they were not opinion makers, just loser guys looking for some strange. That does not make a president. and dean's nutso performance last night only shows that al gore is really an idiot.
Posted by: jannol on January 20, 2004 09:22 AMtesting this form.......
Posted by: Tester on December 8, 2004 05:03 AM