When Netanyahu was in the Opposition, he went around the world backing the Israeli government in public, despite his obviously not agreeing with its policies. Livni, in her first sentence of this "debate", already starts off criticizing the Israeli government rather than presenting the Israeli side.
This does not seem like much of a debate at all - between a prime minister of one nation and the Opposition leader of the other who spends her time undermining her own government.
Part 1:
Part 2:
With all due respect to you and others who live in Israel, regarding your criticism of Livini and of even the way CA framed the opening question, you just don't get how angry and even insulted American journalists are at the refusal of BN to extend the settlement freeze. No official from israel has yet to rationally or coherently explain why BN rejected the freeze even when Obama offered a military bribe to Israel. Perhaps BN has a good explanation besides Lieberman threatening to quit the coalition, but Americans don't know what it is. Thomas Friedman is right and Peter Beinart would be right if not so meanspirited and sarcastic that Americans are suffering plenty of economic woes of our own and are ready to say the hell with aid to Israel and the Pal. Let them find their own solutions. There is tremendous disinterest now in Israel's security except perhaps for her final destruction by Iran, but Israel's hollering about that matter is muted with her intransigence on the settlement issue--right or wrong.
ReplyDeleteHere in Israel it seemed Netanyahu would have gone with the additional freeze and had even shored up the votes in his cabinet to approve it. It fell through when the American refused to put the details of their bribe in writing.
ReplyDeleteBibi was suspicious that when it came time to pay up the details would be too ambiguous and he would end up not getting much of what was promised. It seems the Americans did not really intend to pay up either.
Barak Obama has to do what is in the best interests as he perceives it of the USA. Benjamin Netanyahu has to do what he perceives as the best interests of Israel.
Dr. Goldmeier,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your guest columns and agree with many things you have written previously, but I must disagree with you on this one.
First, two side points:
1. I find it comical how you mentioned that the ones who are angry and insulted are the journalists. 'Nuff said on that one!
2. I read elsewhere on Rafi's blog or a link from it to another, a point I hadn't thought of. Do you know who suffered terrible job losses during the building freeze? Palestinian construction workers. Nice Catch-22 this building freeze. Israel is criticized for provocative construction, but when it stops, Israel is criticized for crippling economic blow it dealt to Palestinian workers.
But as for your main point:
"Americans are suffering plenty of economic woes of our own and are ready to say the hell with aid to Israel and the Pal."
You make it sound as though US foreign aid is purely philanthropic and that cutting it is simply a matter of foregoing an unnecessary luxury in tough economic times. Is there no element of the US's self-interest involved in its decision to provide aid?
Secondly, although it's logical that with all the aid the US provides, it should have "some" influence in the activities of its beneficiaries, it does not turn the recipient into its vassal state. I can't think of any other country who provides aid to another being so controlling as the US is to Israel. You are shocked that for once, Israel actually said no? A chutzpah!
One no in a thousand Yessir, yessir, anything you say, Sirs and you're so ruffled? Are the US and Israel allies, or is it more like parent and child?
If the latter is true, then Israel is selling out on its very sovereignty and that's too steep a price to pay for foreign aid.
(Sort of the path the US is on by continuing to sell more and more debt to China, but I digress...)