Submitted by Brodsky on Fri, 08/08/2008 - 18:35
Israel faces several challenges today including a stalled peace process with an increasing worldwide call for a bi-national state solution; Iran’s nuclear program; and the growing social divide in Israeli society between religious and secular Jews. A two-state solution should remain the only acceptable resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, the calls for one state for Jews and Palestinians alike will continue to gather steam in the future. Given the current demographic situation and problems in Israeli society, maintaining the status quo does not benefit Israel.
Israel faces several challenges today including a stalled peace process with an increasing worldwide call for a bi-national state solution; Iran’s nuclear program; and the growing social divide in Israeli society between religious and secular Jews. A two-state solution should remain the only acceptable resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, the calls for one state for Jews and Palestinians alike will continue to gather steam in the future. Given the current demographic situation and problems in Israeli society, maintaining the status quo does not benefit Israel.
Submitted by Brodsky on Sun, 06/29/2008 - 11:18
By listening to the presidential campaign rhetoric or watching the nightly news, one would not guess that the reality on the ground in Iraq is changing.
Security has improved significantly. Last month, for the first time, fewer U.S. troops were killed in Iraq than in Afghanistan. The numbers of Iraqi citizens killed has also dropped markedly, though it remains unacceptably high. This change is clearly reversible but the people in Iraq and in the region are starting to believe in it.
By listening to the presidential campaign rhetoric or watching the nightly news, one would not guess that the reality on the ground in Iraq is changing.Security has improved significantly. Last month, for the first time, fewer U.S. troops were killed in Iraq than in Afghanistan. The numbers of Iraqi citizens killed has also dropped markedly, though it remains unacceptably high. This change is clearly reversible but the people in Iraq and in the region are starting to believe in it.
Submitted by Brodsky on Tue, 06/17/2008 - 09:01
What links together the conflicts in the Middle East? Isn't it, afterall, possible to feel especially fascinated by the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, feel obligated to resolve it, believe that it should not be difficult to solve given the public parameters, and not believe it is linked to all other conflicts in the Middle East?
What links together the conflicts in the Middle East? Isn't it, afterall, possible to feel especially fascinated by the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, feel obligated to resolve it, believe that it should not be difficult to solve given the public parameters, and not believe it is linked to all other conflicts in the Middle East?
Submitted by Brodsky on Mon, 06/16/2008 - 11:42
For some reason when the West discusses the Middle East all conflicts are seen as linked together so that the resolution of one will ease the prospects for reconciliation for another. Conversely, one conflict that remains unresolved inhibits the solution of another. This thinking gave birth to the 1990s idea of "Comprehensive Peace." That is an all-encompassing peace that satisfies all parties.
Of course, each Middle Eastern state or actor has a different set of interests so the theory of a comprehensive peace means that specific people or governments will be representing the "greater interest." This is problematic because what is good for the Syrians is not necessarily good for the Palestinians, and the Iranians share a different worldview from Iraq, and so on.
For some reason when the West discusses the Middle East all conflicts are seen as linked together so that the resolution of one will ease the prospects for reconciliation for another. Conversely, one conflict that remains unresolved inhibits the solution of another. This thinking gave birth to the 1990s idea of "Comprehensive Peace." That is an all-encompassing peace that satisfies all parties. Of course, each Middle Eastern state or actor has a different set of interests so the theory of a comprehensive peace means that specific people or governments will be representing the "greater interest." This is problematic because what is good for the Syrians is not necessarily good for the Palestinians, and the Iranians share a different worldview from Iraq, and so on.
Submitted by Brodsky on Sun, 06/15/2008 - 08:08
Unlike the June 15, 2008 article headline in the New York Times, "A Year Reshapes Hamas and Gaza," the body of the article testifies to the fact that neither are the case.
The article's author, Ethan Bronner, tries to demonstrate that the "long-term truce" that Hamas would offer if Israel merely agreed to return to the 1967 borders (in other words, give up front all that Hamas wants in return for a temporary truce) is a major advancement on their part.
Furthermore, Bronner concedes that this new Hamas position is not so different from the rest of the Arab world's view on peace talks with Israel. That is, a peace deal is temporary because Israel exists as a fact and is therefore recognized. It is not because they want peace or because Israel is accepted. It is simply a recognition of an unfortunate fact with the desire to see the state destroyed later, once Arab power is restored to its imagined, past glory:
The article's author, Ethan Bronner, tries to demonstrate that the "long-term truce" that Hamas would offer if Israel merely agreed to return to the 1967 borders (in other words, give up front all that Hamas wants in return for a temporary truce) is a major advancement on their part.
Furthermore, Bronner concedes that this new Hamas position is not so different from the rest of the Arab world's view on peace talks with Israel. That is, a peace deal is temporary because Israel exists as a fact and is therefore recognized. It is not because they want peace or because Israel is accepted. It is simply a recognition of an unfortunate fact with the desire to see the state destroyed later, once Arab power is restored to its imagined, past glory:
Submitted by Brodsky on Fri, 06/06/2008 - 14:46
The headline from Gallup's latest poll reads: Americans Favor President Meeting With U.S. Enemies: 6 in 10 think it's a good idea to meet with president of Iran.
Hopefully, sound U.S. policy will be based on sound judgements and strategy, as opposed to opinion polls. This specific poll, however, asked the wrong questions and is of little value.
Hopefully, sound U.S. policy will be based on sound judgements and strategy, as opposed to opinion polls. This specific poll, however, asked the wrong questions and is of little value.
Submitted by Brodsky on Mon, 05/19/2008 - 11:49
The May 26, 2008 edition of "The Nation" dedicates the cover to "Reflections on the 60th Anniversary of the Founding of Israel." Here, again, one of the masters of selective focus, Avi Shlaim, penned his article, "A Somber Anniversary."
Like Benny Morris, Shlaim became famous as one of the founding fathers of the New Historians and Revisionist authors. However, their journeys of late have been mirror opposites. Morris began on the left and has now fallen off the deep end on the right with his political views; Shlaim began on the left and has continued his race to the margins of the left.
The May 26, 2008 edition of "The Nation" dedicates the cover to "Reflections on the 60th Anniversary of the Founding of Israel." Here, again, one of the masters of selective focus, Avi Shlaim, penned his article, "A Somber Anniversary."Like Benny Morris, Shlaim became famous as one of the founding fathers of the New Historians and Revisionist authors. However, their journeys of late have been mirror opposites. Morris began on the left and has now fallen off the deep end on the right with his political views; Shlaim began on the left and has continued his race to the margins of the left.
Submitted by Brodsky on Sun, 05/11/2008 - 21:08
This article is in response to Fedwa Wazwaz's Op-Ed piece, "Israel's 60th is not a reason for celebration," published in Minneapolis's Star Tribune on Saturday, May 10, 2008.
Wazwaz began her piece on why Israelis and Jews should not celebrate Israel’s 60th year of existence by quoting a letter published by British Jews in the Guardian. The small group who are wracked with guilt over the plight of the Palestinians turn to the writing of the late, Edward Said, who emphasized that “what the Holocaust is to the Jews, the Naqba [Catastrophe] is to the Palestinians.” True, Said delighted in this comparison and while there can be no doubt that Palestinians have suffered by the hands of Israelis and Arabs alike, such a statement requires no deep analysis to reveal its absurdity.
This article is in response to Fedwa Wazwaz's Op-Ed piece, "Israel's 60th is not a reason for celebration," published in Minneapolis's Star Tribune on Saturday, May 10, 2008. With great sadness I read Fedwa Wazwaz’s opinion piece on Saturday, May 10 entitled “Israel’s 60th is not a reason for celebration.” Sadder still is that she leads a program to foster dialogue and understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims. Her article moves the Palestinian cause backwards, not forwards.
Wazwaz began her piece on why Israelis and Jews should not celebrate Israel’s 60th year of existence by quoting a letter published by British Jews in the Guardian. The small group who are wracked with guilt over the plight of the Palestinians turn to the writing of the late, Edward Said, who emphasized that “what the Holocaust is to the Jews, the Naqba [Catastrophe] is to the Palestinians.” True, Said delighted in this comparison and while there can be no doubt that Palestinians have suffered by the hands of Israelis and Arabs alike, such a statement requires no deep analysis to reveal its absurdity.
Submitted by Brodsky on Wed, 04/23/2008 - 17:53
Since the 1982 war in Lebanon, Israel has been transformed in mainstream media from the role of David fighting Goliath to the role of Goliath punishing David. In part, this is a symptom of the rise of Israeli and Jewish revisionist historians (Avi Shlaim, Benny Morris, Ilan Pappé, etc.) who began to publish their works in the 1980s; the increasing anti-Israeli biases in most Middle Eastern Studies departments at respected universities; Israel’s failure to present a concise narrative to combat the claims of their opponents; and laziness on the part of many mainstream reporters.
A core problem is that it has become fashionable to publicly bash Israel and draw a moral equivalency between Israeli military strikes against known terrorists and the homicidal terrorists who seek to kill the maximum amount of civilians by strapping on bombs packed with nails. With the growing anti-Israel sentiment in the mainstream media, Americans who support Israel, value America’s security, and understand that there is a global war on political Islam that must be waged and won, will not likely be armed with enough facts to counter absurd claims in Western media and on Western campuses.
Since the 1982 war in Lebanon, Israel has been transformed in mainstream media from the role of David fighting Goliath to the role of Goliath punishing David. In part, this is a symptom of the rise of Israeli and Jewish revisionist historians (Avi Shlaim, Benny Morris, Ilan Pappé, etc.) who began to publish their works in the 1980s; the increasing anti-Israeli biases in most Middle Eastern Studies departments at respected universities; Israel’s failure to present a concise narrative to combat the claims of their opponents; and laziness on the part of many mainstream reporters. A core problem is that it has become fashionable to publicly bash Israel and draw a moral equivalency between Israeli military strikes against known terrorists and the homicidal terrorists who seek to kill the maximum amount of civilians by strapping on bombs packed with nails. With the growing anti-Israel sentiment in the mainstream media, Americans who support Israel, value America’s security, and understand that there is a global war on political Islam that must be waged and won, will not likely be armed with enough facts to counter absurd claims in Western media and on Western campuses.
