|
Monday March 15, 2010 6:50 PM (EST+7)
COMMENTARY: US-Israel rift undermining some long-standing taboos
|
|
|
RAMALLAH, Mar. 15 (JMCC) - Columnist Glenn Greenwald examines the relationship between the US and Israel in the context of the current row over the Israeli announcement of 1600 housing units to be built on occupied Palestinian territory in East Jerusalem. Greenwald points out that proponents of Israeli inside the US are shaping US foreign policy around Israel's interests, possibly to the detriment of the United States.
|
|
|
|
|

|
 |
The rather extraordinary dust-up between the U.S. and Israel has, among other benefits, shined a light on two of the most taboo yet self-evidently true propositions: (1) our joined-at-the-hip relationship with Israel is a significant cause of anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world, fuels attacks on Americans, and entails a very high price for the U.S. on multiple levels; and (2) many American neoconservatives have their political beliefs shaped by allegiance to Israel. As for the first: not only did Joe Biden tell Prime Minister Netanyahu that Israel's actions are endangering U.S. troops in the region, but -- more important -- as Foreign Policy's Mark Perry reports, both Adm. Mike Mullen and Gen. David Petraeus within the last couple of months stressed the same causal connection to Obama officials: "Israel's intransigence could cost American lives." It's rather difficult to maintain the fiction that only fringe Israel-haters see the connection between our support for Israel and Muslim hatred toward the U.S. when two of America's most respected military officials (responsible for U.S. troops in the region) are making that case explicitly. Moreover, the Mullen/Petraeus alarm is almost certainly what accounts for the Obama administration's sudden (and commendable) willingness to so publicly oppose Israel. As Perry says: "There are important and powerful lobbies in America: the NRA, the American Medical Association, the lawyers -- and the Israeli lobby. But no lobby is as important, or as powerful, as the U.S. military." As for the second point: I've previously noted the glaring contradiction among neoconservatives, whereby they simultaneously (a) tell American Jewish voters to vote Republican because (they claim) the GOP is better for Israel and (b) insist that it's anti-Semitic to point out that some are guided by their allegiance to Israel when forming their political beliefs about U.S. policy. Obviously, anyone who does (a) is, by logical necessity, endorsing the very premise in (b) which they want (when it suits them) to label anti-Semitic. Neoconservatives constantly make political appeals to Jewish voters expressly grounded in the premise that American Jews are guided by allegiance to Israel (vote Republican because it's better for Israel), yet then scream "anti-Semite" at anyone who points this out. When faced with this glaring contradiction, their typical response -- as illustratively voiced by Commentary's Jennifer Rubin, after she argued in a 2008 Jerusalem Post column that American Jews should vote against Obama because he'd be bad for Israel -- is to deny that "that the interests of the U.S. and Israel are antithetical" and insist that "support for Israel in no way requires sacrificing one’s concerns for America’s interests." In other words: to advocate for Israel is to advocate for the U.S. because their interests are wholly indistinguishable, even synonymous. Read the full article at Salon...
|

|
|
 |
Log in
Add comment
Rules
( 0 )
|

|
|
|
logindive
|
All comments on blogs are pre-moderated. This means
comments are read before publication to check there
is no obvious breach of the Rules below. Users who
repeatedly break the rules will be blocked from
posting on JMCC.org.
If you become aware of content that breaches these
Rules, please report the abuse using the link on
each blog post.
|
| Rules |
|
Any posting of any message or content by users to
JMCC.org is subject to the following rules.
|
1. Postings must not:
|
a) contain material that is defamatory, abusive,
threatening, obscene, racially or sexually
offensive, in breach of copyright, trademarks or
other intellectual property rights, sexually
explicit or homophobic or in breach of privacy or
confidentiality or which encourages or condones any
illegal or criminal activity or is in any way
unlawful or inappropriate; |
|
b) contain swearing or inappropriate user names; |
|
c) constitute advertising or virus propagation,
provide weblinks that amount to advertising or which
are inappropriate or constitute spamming or
flooding; |
|
d) impersonate any person or entity; |
|
e) solicit or exchange personal information - for
example do not give out your email address, home
address, work place or telephone number or arrange
to meet anyone; |
|
f) be misleading or inaccurate or portray anyone in
a false light; or |
|
g) contain material that is copied or that you do
not own. |
2. You are responsible for liability and any legal
action arising from your posting. You indemnify us
against all losses, claims, damages and expenses
(including the cost of defending or settling any
claim or damages), whether foreseeable or
unforeseeable, suffered or incurred directly or
indirectly arising from your posting.
3. Please be aware that it is possible to trace
internet activity to a specific computer.
4. By submitting a posting to JMCC.org, you grant us
a worldwide royalty free license to use your content
in perpetuity and at our discretion in any media now
known or hereafter developed and you now give us all
waivers (including waivers of moral rights) and
consents to do so.
5. We may refuse to publish and/or remove any
content at any time for any reason at our sole
discretion. If you breach these Rules we may also
prohibit you from submitting further postings to
JMCC.org.
6. We are not responsible or liable for any posting
or for its accuracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|