Since John Bolton was appointed as Donald Trump’s national security advisor, I have spent a good deal of time talking about it. Those conversations have been with colleagues in the policy world, friends, and the media. In honor of the Passover season, here are four questions that have been broadly discussed, and my responses to them. Read more at LobeLog
After weeks of rumors, President Donald Trump today replaced National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster with former Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton. Many foreign policy analysts and advocates immediately expressed deep concern and dismay at Bolton’s appointment.
Former Assistant Secretary of State Philip Crowley tweeted about Bolton’s appointment, “I was at dinner in late 2016 with some former European diplomats when Rex Tillerson emerged as the nominee for (Secretary of State). While unknown, they expressed relief that (Donald Trump’s) choice was not John Bolton. EU diplomats will not sleep well tonight given the latest news.”
Joe Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, a leading anti-nuclear foundation, tweeted, “This is the moment the administration has officially gone off the rails.” While the Mideast advocacy group J Street tweeted that “Bolton is an unabashed advocate for the premature, unnecessary and reckless use of military force in the Middle East and around the globe. This appointment isn’t just unwise. It’s disastrous.”
The brazen nature of Bolton’s appointment was underscored by the fact that it came the same day that news broke of Bolton having recorded a video for a Russian gun group in 2013, after being introduced to the group by the National Rifle Association (NRA). Given the scandals around Russia and the NRA of late, the indifference to the politics of this news speaks volumes about the White House’s commitment to Bolton.
As outraged as many supporters of diplomacy have been at Trump’s appointments and policies, Bolton’s appointment reaches a new level. Here at LobeLog, we are reprinting, with permission, the profile of John Bolton from Right Web, a site which tracks the activities of a vast array of right wing and militaristic figures and organizations. Read more at LobeLog
UPDATE 8/16: Labor chief Avi Gabbay took a while, but today did issue a very strong statement condemning the events in Charlottesville, clearly blaming the white supremacists and implicitly complaining about Trump’s response. Statement in Hebrew here, translation by Mikhael Manikin here
Author’s Note: This article was published just hours before Benjamin Netanyahu made his reprehensibly late and weak statement on Charlottesville. To this piece, which I hope you will read in full at LobeLog, I will add that Netanyahu’s pro forma statement was, in its way not just an imitation of Trump, but actually far worse. What we have seen here is an Israeli Prime Minister, one who has, over the years, been only too eager to cynically use anti-Semitism to defend holding millions of Palestinians without the most basic human and civil rights that most of us simply take for granted; to marginalize, demonize and physically imperil political opponents, activists and those who work for peace and human rights; and even to protect his own personal position, take his cues from a US President who supports, and seems very much to agree with, white nationalists and neo-Nazis.
Netanyahu has truly shown the world what the “new anti-Semitism” is. It is not, as he and others would have it, a phenomenon of the “pro-Palestinian left.” It is certainly not connected in any way with supporters of a two-state solution. No, it is the phenomenon that Netanyahu has led in creating and cultivates today with his allies and friends in a white nationalist White House. It is the phenomenon, in the grand tradition of classical anti-Semitism, of differentiating between the good Jews and the bad Jews. What makes it new is that it is being done by Israeli leaders.
For Netanyahu, as with his friends in the Trump Administration, the Zionist Organization of America, Christians United for Israel and, yes, much (though not all) of AIPAC, among many other channels, the good Jews are the nationalists. For them, any ally is a good ally, no matter how anti-Semitic or racist, as long as they support Israel in all it does, particularly its occupation and denial of Palestinian rights. The good Jews are the Stephen Millers, the David Friedmans, the Jared Kushners, the Morton Kleins. The bad Jews are pretty much all the rest of us, including many Zionists who support two states, believe Palestinians deserve human rights, or just think that a small group of misogynistic, anachronistic orthodox rabbis do not have the right to dictate Judaism to all of us.
It couldn’t be more clear. Netanyahu, already well established as a racist (we have not forgotten the last election, just to name a relatively recent and very blatant example), has sided with white nationalists, Jewish nationalists, even European nationalists (see the article for more on this) against the vast majority of the Jewish people, including against most Israeli Jews. Never forget it. And think it through clearly as you consider your politics regarding Palestine, Israel, and the Jewish people.
Israel’s Silence on Charlottesville
The awful events in Charlottesville, Virginia this past weekend presented politicians with an opportunity to score an easy political point, simply by condemning the white supremacists who sparked the violence. Many politicians took advantage of that opportunity. That included right wing politicians such as Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL), John McCain (R-AZ), and Orrin Hatch (R-UT), as well as the Vice President, Mike Pence. German Chancellor Angela Merkel was the most prominent of international voices deploring the display of racism and bigotry.
US President Donald Trump, by contrast, condemned violence “on many sides,” and for two days pointedly refused to criticize the racist thugs who brought their march of hate to Charlottesville, one of whose number is a blatant murderer. For this, Trump was sharply criticized by Democrats and Republicans, until finally, today, he was forced to condemn the right wing violence and name some of the hate groups—even though they support him.
But there is silence coming from another corner, one that is far more surprising. That deafening silence is coming from the Israeli government, and most notably from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Netanyahu has a long history of condemning anti-Semitism, both real and imagined. He has played a huge role in creating the narrative that virtually all support for Palestinian rights and criticism of Israel’s human rights record is rooted in anti-Semitism. Until recently, he rarely missed an opportunity to raise the specter of anti-Semitism.
Now, when confronted with Nazis chanting anti-Semitic slogans and marching through the streets of the United States while the President responded with dog whistles that clearly pleased his white supremacist supporters, Netanyahu says nothing. Read more at LobeLog
Over the past few years, there has been a good deal of consternation in Israel and in the American Jewish community about the relationship between the two. That concern has grown as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu consistently works to please his right flank with ever more controversial statements and actions amid a petrified peace process.
Neoconservative pundit Elliott Abrams reviewed two new books that document this phenomenon and try to explain it. Trouble in the Tribe: The American Jewish Conflict over Israel by Dov Waxman of Northeastern University and The Star and the Stripes: A History of the Foreign Policies of American Jews by Michael Barnett of George Washington University both look at shifts in Israeli policy over the years and examine the effects of those policy shifts on Jews in the United States. Abrams sees both books as blaming Israel for the growing divide with the US Jewish community, and he feels compelled to respond by laying the blame instead on Jews in the United States. Read more at LobeLog
Samantha Power is certain to win confirmation for the post of Ambassador to the UN. Her execrable testimony at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday all but sealed the deal. And why now, when a so-called human rights defender has the support of people like Alan Dershowitz, who advocates the destruction of entire Palestinian villages, and other notable bleeding hearts like John McCain, Joe Lieberman, Max Boot and others. I report for IPS here.
This article originally appeared at LobeLog.
When is a coup not a coup? When calling it that carries repercussions that make a bad situation worse.
US President Barack Obama is struggling with recent events in Egypt. Once again he’s presented with a situation in the Middle East where he has few good options but is still facing expectations based on a long history of US influence over events — an influence that is no longer situated in reality.
In contrast to the revolution that deposed Hosni Mubarak two years ago, the ouster of Mohammed Morsi raises some profound questions, not only for foreign powers, but for Egyptians themselves. There is no doubt that Morsi brought a lot of this on himself. He neglected the major issue for almost all Egyptians, the economy; he shamelessly tried to grab dictatorial powers; he did not follow through on his campaign promises to include the widest spectrum of Egyptians in his government; and, when confronted with all of this, he remained obstinate. Continue reading