Take a particularly provocative and grandstanding Israeli government and shift its focus from Hamas and Gaza to Jerusalem and you have a most explosive recipe. That potion is being stirred now, and the results could shake up the status quo in a way that we have only seen a few times in Israel’s history. Read more at LobeLog
Archive for the ‘Jerusalem’ Category
Posted in Jerusalem, tagged Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, al-Aqsa, al-Quds, ARab League, East Jerusalem, Hamas, Haram al-Sharif, Hashemite, ISIS, Jerusalem, Jerusalem light rail attack, Jordan, Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty, King Abdullah, Muslim Brotherhood, Netanyahu, Refugees, Religious Zionism, Temple Mount, Yehuda Glick, Zionism on November 7, 2014 | Leave a Comment »
The photo here, linked to the Ha’aretz article from which it comes, makes it as clear as you could want just how threatening the new settlement, Givat Hamatos is. It doesn’t threaten “peace”; it doesn’t “call into question Israel’s commitment to peace.” Few have any illusions anymore that Israel has any interest in peace.
What it does is to expand Israel’s presence into Jerusalem. That will bury the old formula for Jerusalem (according to the Clinton Parameters, Jerusalem would be divided according to the formula “what is Jewish is Israel’s, what is Arab is Palestine’s). That may not be a very big deal. But it extends Israel’s grip on the eastern part of the city and, as you can see fro the map, future settlements can easily be placed in strategic positions to surround Arab villages…much as settlements do in the rest of the West Bank.
The US reaction is completely shameful. It’s worse than the usual kowtowing or tongue-clucking. In this case, the US reaction makes it clear that the Obama Administration knows full well just how damaging Givat Hamatos is, and STILL will not do a thing to stop it, but will continue to obstruct other parties (chiefly the UNSC but also the EU) from acting.
Posted in Jerusalem, United States, tagged AIPAC, Congress, Hillary Clinton, Israel legal status, Israel supreme court case, Jerusalem, Jerusalem provision, John Kerry, John Robert, Menachem Zivotofsky, Seth Lipsky, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, Supreme Court hearings, Zivotofsky v Clinton, Zivotofsky v Kerry on April 22, 2014 | 2 Comments »
The Israel-Palestine usually takes up a disproportionate amount of attention in two of the three branches of the US government. Now, the third is getting into the mix. The radical irresponsibility of the Roberts Court, which has already gone a long way to robbing Americans of the principle of “one person, one vote” is now quite inappropriately sticking its nose into a dispute between Congress and the State Department over identifying Jerusalem as Israel for the purposes of US passports.
There are some serious implications here. I explore them at LobeLog.
Posted in Barack Obama, Bibi Netanyahu, Jerusalem, tagged AIPAC, Israel, Jerusalem, Jewish State, Middle east, Netanyahu, Obama, Peace Groups, pro-Israel, Settlements, Two-state solution on May 19, 2011 | 4 Comments »
Today, the day of President Barack Obama’s long-anticipated “Middle East reboot” speech and one day before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due to meet with Obama, the Israeli Prime Minister’s office (PMO) took up discussionon two major East Jerusalem settlement expansion projects, in Pisgat Ze’ev and Har Homa.
This is not coincidence, nor bureaucratic happenstance. Terrestrial Jerusalem posted information about this more than a week ago. The discussion was intentionally put off before in order not to upset Netanyahu’s discussions with European leaders.
Upsetting the Americans is not a concern.
Truly Israeli hubris knows no bounds. But then, why should it?
Should this cause a controversy, defenders of the occupation will come out of the woodwork to say “it’s no big deal, it’s the Palestinians who are blocking progress, why are you pressuring Israel?” And Congress and, perhaps grudgingly, the President and State Department too will support that line of thinking.
So why should Israel limit its hubris? We encourage it, we allow Netanyahu to embarrass our president, our diplomatic corps, indeed our entire foreign policy in the region. We allow a country we call a friend and ally to doom itself to perpetual conflict, which it eventually cannot win, while pursuing policies that keep a dangerous region dangerous, jeopardizing both American influence in the region and American citizens, in and out of its military, on the ground.
As Daniel Levy has frequently pointed out, every successive commander of CENTCOM (The United States Central Command, the main command post in the Middle East) has agreed that Israeli policies are dangerous for US troops and interests. As every American foreign service officer, including former ambassadors, I’ve discussed this with agrees, Israeli actions severely undermine the US position in the region. (more…)
Well, AIPAC got the message. At around 7 PM tonight, I received another e-mail from them, following the sleazy attempt to rake in the bucks off of today’s bombing in Jerusalem. It reads, in full:
Dear Friends of Israel:
Today, you received an email from us about the dangers facing Israel right now and ways in which you can help ensure American support for Israel at a difficult and dangerous time. We included information about the horrific bombing in Jerusalem. In hindsight, it was wrong of us to mention this terrible tragedy the same day it occurred in the context of this email. We are deeply sorry.
We express our sympathies to all those impacted by today’s events and extend our heartfelt apologies to you.
I’d love to think they give a damn about what I say, but I’m sure this was so far beyond the line that many of their own supporters complained. Hence the apology, which doesn’t actually admit what they did, which was blatantly to use the bombing today as a fundraising tool. They say it was “information” they merely “included.”
Still, I suppose that this message at least shows there is some shred of decency, if not in AIPAC itself, at least among their supporters. No doubt such would not have been on display if the victims were not Jews, but one can hardly wish for the moon here.