- ‹ previous
- 3819 of 8795
- next ›
5 Questions On Israel For The Next Debate
As I've said before, there's been a vacuum surrounding Israel and Palestine this campaign season. Moderators have broached the issue only twice in the last 13 debates. And the most recent question, posed by Wendell Goler last week at the Fox News debate in South Carolina, was pretty weak. As Goler wound up—"Mayor Giuliani, President Bush is in the Middle East ... laying the groundwork for a Palestinian state"—there was, briefly, a glimmer of hope. Then he tossed this doozy of a softball: "I wonder, sir, how you would keep a Palestinian state from becoming a breeding ground for anti-American terrorism." One of several surreal assumptions behind the question seemed to be, "The Palestinians are prostrate, mightn't it be better if they're kept that way?" And that to the candidate with the Likudnik A-team advising him. Oh, well.
Since the debates have been so deficient in this area, I asked five well-informed Middle East observers what they would ask the candidates on the issue, if they could ask anything. The only ground rule was to keep it brief; no other boundaries. Here are their responses:
From Juan Cole of Informed Comment: Has Israeli colonization of the West Bank proceeded to the point where a two-state solution has become impractical? And, if so, isn't there now a choice between an Apartheid state or a one-state solution?
From Matthew Duss of TAPPED: Recognizing that Israel's settlements in the occupied territories are considered illegal under international law, and recognizing that their relentless expansion, which has continued over the last decade despite repeated Israeli assurances to the contrary, is both a source of Palestinian suffering and a major instigator of extremism and violence, as well as being deeply prejudicial to final status negotiations, are you prepared to take a firm stand against the settlements, and to carry through with real consequences if Israel does not cease settlement expansion?
From Trita Parsi, author of Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States: Since 1993, the United States has pursued a policy of seeking peace between Israel and Palestine by isolating Iran. As former Assistant Secretary of State Martin Indyk said, the two were symbiotic. Peace was necessary to isolate Iran, isolating Iran was necessary for peace. Fifteen years later, we can conclude that this strategy was an utter failure. Yet, the Bush Administration is following a similar path, seeking to create an alliance of Israel and Sunni Arab dictatorships to isolate Iran under the guise of peacemaking. In your administration, how would you approach the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? By repeating the Bush/Clinton policy or by pursuing a holistic approach aimed at giving all regional actors a stake in the outcome and process of peacemaking?
From Philip Weiss of Mondoweiss: Why is it that our last two presidents only made a major push on Israel/Palestine at the end of their 8-year terms, when they had nothing politically to lose? Doesn't this show that this is the big enchilada in foreign affairs and that our politics around this issue are unhealthy? What will you do differently, before your 8 years are up?
From Stephen Zunes of Foreign Policy in Focus: For Senator Clinton. During the 2006 war in Lebanon, you co-sponsored a resolution condemning Hezbollah for its alleged use of "human shields." Since then, detailed on-the-ground studies by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, while highly critical of Hezbollah's responsibility for civilian deaths in Israel, have challenged the claims by the Bush administration that Hezbollah's alleged use of "human shields" contributed to the high numbers of civilian deaths from Israeli bombardment in Lebanon. Similarly, the reports of these credible human rights organizations have placed responsibility for the vast majority of the 800 Lebanese civilian deaths on the government of Israel. Are you willing to acknowledge that Israel was culpable for most of the Lebanese civilian deaths? And, as president, would you belittle the findings of human rights groups in order to support violations of international humanitarian law by U.S. allies?
I'll be sending these along to the next few debate moderators. Have a good question for the candidates on Israel? Put proposals in the comments.—Justin Elliott
Great questions but the election is about anything except substance so . . .
More importantly:
How much do the candidates pay for a haircut?
Very good article.
You are right again, Prof. Watson. An outstanding article.
Demagoguery at its worst
The country that stand with Israel will be blessed and the country that stand against it will fall. Blessed are they that supports Israel
America should give up pressurising Israel for peace by giving up land.It will never work. Blessed is America if it continues to support Israel and stop pressurising it for peace deal. There is no peace until the Messaiah comes.
Would it not be better to give detroit to the palestinians in order to allow them more time to build rockets to launch against israel?
Where in the Bible does it say that Israel must be supported for a nation to have God's blessing? It doesn't. One finds those ideas in John Darby's "Premillenial Dispensationalism" a hokum of supposed interpretation of the book of Revelations.
Darby's interpretation is great if you want to support Israel at all costs, including having perpetual war globally over terrorism, But if you want peace, which I am sure Jesus does, we must follow His teachings and treat others as we we want to be treated ourselves. In real terms this means a cooperative, just and humane foreign policy by the US, and a just and humane resolution of the conflict with the Palestinians by Israel, achieved in good faith and respect. This is achievable, if the "End-timers," "Settlers" and other hawk-types would get out of the way.
This "tough guy" god that so many American Christians worship is mirrored in the Presidents we elect and the policies they pursue. Those of us that can imagine a better world than one headed toward Armageddon had better assert ourselves, and fast, before the "diverse" Pro-Israel lobby drives us and Israel off a geo-political cliff.
I have a question for MoJo. When are you going to begin showing some diversity in your hiring? Where are your Arab authors/experts? If they are not Jewish, they take a nuanced pro-Israeli stance. And your "arab" authors are neocon or CFR-type allies. A W Bank Palestinian would be totally beyond you. MoJo used to be a great mag, and now youre just another left-lite gatekeeper. Uruknet is the place to go for ME politics.
Question for the Democratic candidates:
The advisors to President Clinton on the Israeli-Palestinian situation remain divided to this day concerning what occurred during the Clinton years and what lessons are to be learned from that period. In your administration would you more likely follow the recommendations of Dennis Ross and Martin Indyck or Robert Malley and Aaron Miller.
Question for candidates: Seeing that for the last thirty or forty years all US attempts to resolve the Israeli Palestinian confrontation have failed, do you think it might in the best interest of all parties that the US retreat to a position of neutrality and urge the UN take the leadership role in seeking a resolution?
Stephen Zunes question has an easy response. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. They don't have uniforms. If one is killed, propagandists can easily claim the death as civilian. Next question..
Hasn't worked out so well for us so far. Billions down the drain, the outrageous attack on the USS Liberty and the celebration on the WTC destruction by a crew of Mossad agents across the river in NJ. Some friends.
We should stop giving any more funds to Isreal, period. Until they withdraw from the illegal territories and play nice with the Arabs. Just cut the funds to them. Period.
Here's one: Demands for Israel to dismantle its settlements in the Occupied Territories are based, for the most part, on U.N. Resolution 242. However, the resolution also states that *all* countries in the area must recognize one another's right to exist within secure borders. Israel is a legal entity unrecognized by many countries in the area; the Palestinian Arabs have never had a political state. That being the case, will you insist upon mutual recognition along with continued U.N. verification of the security of the agreed-upon borders along with Israel's dismantling of the settlements as a requirement for any future Mideast peace agreement?
ruforreal: Nah, it'd be better to give Auschwitz to Israel so they can finish their Final Solution to the Palestinian Problem.
Recently, I have been shocked and appalled by the unqualified support by some Christian televangelists for the most anti-Christian religion on the face of the earth, Judaism. They also support the corrupt, Jewish supremacist, anti-Christian Israeli state. I know that some of you reading this may respond by saying that Islam is really the most anti-Christian religion and that Judaism is a friendly faith. Many mistakenly think that Judaism is a sister religion to Christianity. The term "Judeo-Christian" has entered our modern lexicon to the point where no politician, George Bush on down, would dare even invoke the term "Christian heritage" without adding the prefix, "Judeo" to it. The term "Judeo-Christian" didn't even come into existence until after the Second World War when Jews became supreme in their influence over major media.
The truth is that there is no such thing as Judeo-Christianity. That would be like saying Satanic-Christianity. The religion now called Judaism did not even come formally into existence until six hundred years after Jesus Christ. It began with the codification of the Babylonian Talmud. In Judaism, the Talmud is the supreme scripture, not the Old Testament. Only Satanism can rival Judaism's vicious hatred for Jesus Christ. The Talmud even claims that Jesus Christ is being punished in hell by "being boiled in hot semen!"1
When I first read this hateful Talmudic quote, I just couldn't believe it. Maybe you don't believe what I am saying right now, but read on and I will prove to you that this quotation is accurate and that Judaism is intrinsically and viciously anti-Christian. Judaism it the embodiment of the same Satanic tradition that Christ condemned when He referred to "the synagogue of Satan." (Rev. 2-9) What I say here I can prove in the documented words of the most sacred texts of Judaism and in the clearly documented words of the highest authorities of Judaism itself, and even more importantly, in the scriptures of the New Testament.
Good artile MoJo. Israel promotes NOT a vision of a inclusive "multi-cultural," "multi-ethnic" society (like we do in America) for Israel, but instead a racist exclusionary "Jewish state." It is racist because a Jew is defined as coming from a Jewish mother(genes). That state is openly dedicated to the advancement of the Jewish religion, culture, and even the genetic preservation of the Jewish people. Israel uses racial profiling. Israel values Judaism above other religions. Israel should seek to be welcoming and inclusive and respect all religions, or even those with no religion.
Israeli ethnocentric, chauvinism and xenophobic values are just too extreme. Israel does not share American values and let us therefore not share American taxpayer money with them. Israel needs to advance to the 21st century in its values. The days of racism should be a thing of the past. Israeli society is where America's society was 100 years ago. Israel can do better. Let us have that as our goal to advance Israel to the 21st century in the field of civil rights.
My debate question: "President Bush's "faith-based" foreign policy is clearly more influenced by Israel's Likud Party and their Iran agenda than he is by the most recent NIE which represents the consensus views of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies. Would you, as President, continue to allow Israel and its neo-con representatives to dictate U.S. foreign policy, as they did with Iraq, or would you rely on the combined intelligence of the 16 intelligence agencies of the U.S. government?"
3/28/01 Nelson Mandela Nobel Peace Prize letter)"If you follow the polls in Israel for the last 30 or 40 years, you clearly find a vulgar racism that includes a third of the population who openly declare themselves to be racist. This racism is of the nature of "I hate Arabs" and "I wish Arabs would be dead". If you also follow the judicial system in Israel you will see there is discrimination against Palestinians, and if you further consider the 1967 occupied territories you will find there are already two judicial systems in operation that represent two different approaches to human life: one for Palestinian life and the other for Jewish life. Additionally there are two different approaches to property and to land. Palestinian property is not recognized as private property because it can be confiscated. Palestinians are not struggling for a "state" but for freedom, liberation and equality, just like we were struggling for freedom in South Africa. Israel's racial discrimination is daily life of most Palestinians. Since Israel is a Jewish state, Israeli Jews are able to accrue special rights which non-Jews cannot do. Israel has deprived millions of Palestinians of their liberty and property. It has perpetuated a system of gross racial discrimination and inequality. It has systematically incarcerated and tortured thousands of Palestinians, contrary to the rules of international law. It has, in particular, waged a war against a civilian population, in particular children." Nobel Peace Prize winner, Jimmy Carter agrees.
Focusing just on Dr Zunes's question, the "detailed on-the-ground studies" he refers to are largely based on "evidence" provided by Lebanese eyewitnesses, whose credibility and links to Hezbollah were not investigated by the NGOs. This is a very poor example for NGO credibility.
Once one realises that human shields were being used and that civilian deaths were a result of Hezbollah's violation of international law the situation must be viewed in a radically different light to that Dr Zunes uses.
I've written a fuller reply at the NGO Monitor blog, the post can be seen by clicking my name above or visiting:
http://blog.ngo-monitor.org/human-rights/us-elections-5-questions-on-isr...
I think that one or more of these posts are anti-Semitic.
My questions:
1. Senator Obama wants to limit the influence of PACS and lobbyists in government. Does he agree with recent studies that AIPAC has had a negative influence on US policy in terms of achieving peace in Israel, and does his plan include limiting AIPAC's influence?
2. Senator Obama visited the Occupied Territories and spoke with Palestinian students about the necessity of good, uncorrupt Palestinian governance in order to achieve peace. This places the responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the Palestinians - but what can Israel do as a powerful nation that enjoys the friendship of the US do to help the Palestinians achieve this?
3. Senator Obama famously said 'nobody suffers more than the Palestinians' - what exactly did he mean by this? What would he attribute the cause of their suffering to, and does he think that the illegal occupation of Palestinian land by Israel plays little role in this, rather, it's the fault of Palestinian leadership entirely?
4. How would Senator Obama respond to the claims of Jimmy Carter that Israel practices Apartheid, and Nelson Mandela's that Israel practices 'a unique type of colonialism' like that in South Africa during Apartheid?
Steven Edwards, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Wednesday, January 30, 2008
UNITED NATIONS - Louise Arbour, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, has thrown her support behind a major pan-Arab human rights charter that commits to the elimination of Zionism.
Some critics say the wording is code for the destruction of Israel, but in a statement from her Geneva headquarters, the former justice of the Supreme Court of Canada welcomes the Arab Charter on Human Rights, which will come into force in mid-March.
"Regional systems of promotion and protection can further help strengthen the enjoyment of human rights, and the ... charter is an important step forward in this direction," Ms. Arbour says. The charter's preamble speaks of "rejecting all forms of racism and Zionism," alleging they violate human rights and threaten international peace and security.
Article 2 of the 53-article document says "all forms of racism, Zionism and foreign occupation and domination" should be "condemned and efforts must be deployed for their elimination."
You Americans are really funny. Is Zionism racism if it encompasses very black people from Ethiopia, loads of people from Arab countries, Europeans, South Americans? Does Zionism mitigate against freedom of speech, thought or religion in its immigration policy? Most of us are less religious than you Americans.
What you fail to understand is that Zionism is a national movement of a community that identifies itself (or has been identified by others) as Jewish. You may believe in or reject our right to a national identity - but claiming that we run some 'genetic' form of racism as does Prof Wadsworth is unfounded.
Washington Post, "on Faith" 1/7/08, Mahatama"s grandson, President and co-founder of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence.
Jewish Identity Can't Depend on Violence
Jewish identity in the past has been locked into the holocaust experience -- a German burden that the Jews have not been able to shed. It is a very good example of a community that can overplay a historic experience to the point that it begins to repulse friends. The holocaust was the result of the warped mind of an individual who was able to influence his followers into doing something dreadful. But, it seems to me that the Jews today not only want the Germans to feel guilty but the whole world must regret what happened to the Jews. The world did feel sorry for the episode but when an individual or a nation refuses to forgive and move on the regret turns into anger.
The Jewish identity in the future appears bleak. Any nation that remains anchored to the past is unable to move ahead and, especially a nation that believes its survival can only be ensured by weapons and bombs. In Tel Aviv in 2004 I had the opportunity to speak to some Members of Parliament and Peace activists all of whom argued that the wall and the military build-up was necessary to protect the nation and the people. In other words, I asked, you believe that you can create a snake pit -- with many deadly snakes in it -- and expect to live in the pit secure and alive? What do you mean? they countered. Well, with your superior weapons and armaments and your attitude towards your neighbors would it not be right to say that you are creating a snake pit? How can anyone live peacefully in such an atmosphere? Would it not be better to befriend those who hate you? Can you not reach out and share your technological advancement with your neighbors and build a relationship?
Apparently, in the modern world, so determined to live by the bomb, this is an alien concept. You don't befriend anyone, you dominate them. We have created a culture of violence (Israel and the Jews are the biggest players) and that Culture of Violence is eventually going to destroy humanity.(Arun Gandhi is the fifth grandson of India's legendary leader, Mohandas K. "Mahatma" Gandhi. He is president and co-founder of the M. K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence, now at the University of Rochester in New York)
The holocaust was not the result of a warped mind of an individual but of a society that for all sorts of reasons was ready to be "guided" by that individual.
Our Israeli society for all sorts of reasons is showing itself willing to be "guided" by a small group of religious maniacs as distinct from an individual. The problem in both cases is a social one. A number of the nations around us are also guided by not so small groups of religious maniacs.
Just as Gandhi's principles would not have been effective in Nazi Germany, they are ineffective in dealing both with the Israeli occupation and the desire of all to-many people to do away with the State of Israel even within the '67 borders.
Contrary to myth it is unlikely that Gandhi would have achieved what he did had there not existed a extremely violent Hindu and Moslem alternative. Peace makers often achieve what they do because there is a price to rejecting their message.
Does Arun judge that "Jews and Israel" are the biggest players in the "culture of violence" on the number of people killed? On the kind of weapons used? On the ideological positions of the individuals used? How do any of these measures compare with what is going on in other parts of the world today?
Greens Demand Transparency from Israel on Nuclear Weapons
WASHINGTON - July 8,2004 - Green Party leaders are calling on the Bush Administration to put pressure on Israel to open up its nuclear weapons program to international scrutiny.
Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency, has demanded that Israel cooperate with the effort to rid the Middle East of nuclear weapons, but the Israeli government has refused to acknowledge that it possesses such arms.
"Israel may already have as many nuclear warheads as Great Britain," said Julia Willebrand, co-chair of the International Committee of the Green Party of the United States. "Israel is not formally listed among the countries which have acquired WMDs. Western governments have allowed Israel to maintain its 'nuclear ambiguity' stance too long, provoking suspicions that the U.S. might have shared nuclear technology with Israel."
Israel's treatment of Palestinians -- those who are Israeli citizens as well as those in the territories -- is comparable in many ways to South African apartheid, and has resulted in a cycle of violence and lack of security for both Israelis and Palestinians," said a member of the Green Party of Wisconsin. "A stable and just resolution of the conflict requires the full realization of the human rights of Palestinians and Israelis." Real environmentalists and progressives vote Green.
Question for candidates: If you must insist on involving us in a foreign conflict that's none of our damned business, then why do you favor the side that has no petroleum to sell us?
We must all work for the peaceful dismantlement of the Zionist state. After promising up and down that it only wanted to develop nuclear technology for peaceful/energy purposes it proceeded to buildup a secret arsenal. Now its partisans accuse Iran of doing exactly that. The coming century will see Zionist lies exposed one by one until everyone, especially Jews all over the world, will realize they've been had.
Reverend David, you're right in principle but you should be aware that it is Balaam who is boiling in semen in hell at the moment. Jesus is actually boiling in excrement. And elsewhere in the Talmud the rabbis take credit for trying and executing Jesus. See Jesus in the Talmud by Princeton's Peter Schafer, which is rather apologistic towards Talmudic Judaism on this score but for that reason can't be accused of distortion...