RINF Alternative News
.
Israel is often viewed by Washington
politicians as the most “stable” ally in the Middle East. But stability from
the American perspective can mean many things. Lead amongst them is that the
“ally” must be unconditionally loyal to the diktats of the US administration.
This rule has proven to be true since the United States claimed a position of
ascendency, if not complete hegemony over many regions of the world since World
War II. Israel, however, remained an exception.
.
.
The
rules by which US-Israeli relations are governed are perhaps the most bewildering
of all foreign policies of any two countries.
.
.
An
illustration of this would be to consider these comments by Israeli Defense
Minister Moshe Ya’alon quoted in the Israeli news portal Ynetnews.
.
.
“The
American security plan presented to us is not worth the paper it’s written on,”
he said, referring to efforts underway since July by American Secretary of
State John Kerry, “who turned up here determined and acting out of misplaced
obsession and messianic fervor.” Kerry “cannot teach me anything about the
conflict with the Palestinians,” said Ya’alon.
.
.
So
far, Kerry has made 10 trips to the Middle East with the intention of hammering
out an agreement between Israel
and the Palestinian Authority (PA). Based on media reports, it seems that the
potential agreement is composed in such a way that it mostly accommodates Israel‘s “security” whims and obsessions,
including a proposal to keep eastern West Bank regions and the Jordan Valley
under Israeli military control. In fact, there is growing interest in the idea
of “land swaps” which was floated by Israel‘s
notorious Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman 10 years ago.
.
.
“When
Mr. Lieberman first proposed moving Arab-populated Israeli towns near the
present border into Palestine
in exchange for Jewish settlement blocs in the Palestinians’ West Bank being
incorporated into Israel,
he was branded a racist firebrand,” wrote the Economist on Jan. 18. “Liberals
accused him of promoting the forcible ‘transfer’ plan, akin to ethnic
cleansing, proclaimed by a rabbi, Meir Kahane, who vilified Arabs while calling
for a pure Jewish state.”
.
.
Those
days are long gone, as Israeli society drifted rightward. “Even some dovish
Israeli left-wingers find such ideas reasonable.”
.
.
Back
then, the Americans themselves were irked, even if just publically, whenever
such ideas of “population transfers’ and ethnic cleansing were presented by Israel‘s ultra-right politicians. Now, the
Americans find them malleable and a departure point for discussion. And it’s
Kerry himself who is leading the American efforts to accommodate Israel‘s endless list of demands ~ of
security and racial exclusiveness even if at the expense of Palestinians. So
why is Ya’alon unhappy?
.
.
The
Defense Minister, who sat immediately next to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
during talks with Kerry, was unapologetic about his reasoning:
“Only our continued presence in Judea and Samaria and the River Jordan will endure.” It means unrelenting Israeli military occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Netanyahu
is hardly an innocent bystander in all of this, although for diplomatic reasons
he often entrusts his government minions to deliver such messages. The Prime
Minister is busy issuing more orders to populate the occupied West Bank with
Jewish settlements, and berating every government that rejects such insidious behaviour
as being anti-Israel,
“pro-Palestinian” or worse, anti-Semitic. This was the case again in recent
days following another announcement of settlement expansion.
.
.
On
Jan. 17, Netanyahu called on Europe
to stop its “hypocrisy.”
On the same day, Israel‘s foreign ministry summoned the ambassadors of Britain, France, Italy and Spain, “accusing their countries of pro-Palestinian bias,” reported the BBC online.
.According to the ministry, the “perpetual one-sided stance” of these countries is unacceptable.
Yet,
considering that Europe
has supported Israel‘s
illegal occupation of Palestinian territories for decades, economically
sustained the “Jewish state” and its over 100 illegal Jewish settlements, and
continues with its often unconditional military support of Israel, the accusations may appear strange
and equally bewildering to that of Ya’alon against John Kerry.
How could a country the size of Israel have so much sway over the world’s greatest powers, where it gets what it wants and more, hurls regular insults against its sustainers, and still asks for more?
European
countries found themselves in Israel‘s
firing line because a day earlier, the four EU countries took the rare step of
summoning Israeli ambassadors to object to the Netanyahu government’s latest
announcement of illegal settlement expansion (that of an additional 1,400 new
homes). EU foreign policy Chief Catherine Ashton even went to the extent of
calling the settlements “an obstacle to peace,” although hardly an advanced
position considering that Israel‘s
colonial project in Palestine
has been in motion for 46 years.
.
.
But even that is too much from the Israeli point of view.
“The EU calls our ambassadors in because of the construction of a few houses?”
Netanyahu
asked as if baffled by a seemingly foreboding act, in a Jan 16 press
conference. He even had the audacity to say this:
“I think it pushes peace further away because it tells the Palestinians: “Basically you can do anything you want, say anything you want and you won’t be held accountable.”
There
is no sense in arguing with Netanyahu’s strange logic, but the question
regarding Israel‘s stronghold over the US and EU
remains more pressing than ever, especially when one considers the ruckus in US
Congress. No, the congress is not revolting because of the unmitigated power of
the Zionist lobby, but for something far more interesting.
.
.
There
seems to be a level of confusion in US Congress because members of the Senate
are yet to feel serious pressure by the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) over a bill that proposes more sanctions on Iran.
.
.
“The
powerful pro-Israel
lobby has not engaged in a shoe-leather lobbying campaign to woo wayward
senators and push Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to schedule a vote
on the bill … While the group supports the bill ~ authored by Sens. Mark Kirk
(R-Ill.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) ~ it is not yet putting its political
muscle behind a push for an immediate vote,” reported Politico, citing key
senators and their aides.
To say the least,it is disturbing that the US Senateis completely bewildered that AIPAC,which lobbies for the interest of a foreign power,has yet to provide its guidelinesregarding the behaviour
“I
don’t know where AIPAC is. I haven’t talked to anybody,” said Senate Armed
Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.). “I don’t know what they’re doing,” said
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
.
.
This
alone should shed some light on the seemingly bewildering question of the
“strong bond” and “stable” alliance of Israel
and the US ~ and to a lesser degree EU countries.
.
This is not to suggest that Israel has complete dominance over US foreign policy in the Middle East, but to ignore Israel‘s indispensable role in shaping the outlook of US foreign policy is dishonest and inconsistent with the facts, to put it mildly.
.
This is not to suggest that Israel has complete dominance over US foreign policy in the Middle East, but to ignore Israel‘s indispensable role in shaping the outlook of US foreign policy is dishonest and inconsistent with the facts, to put it mildly.
No comments:
Post a Comment
If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.