grodscorp@grods.comExplaining the silence
 | Posted by Bridgit Gread on Thursday 8 January 2009, 12:27 pm Categories: Blogosphere, Them crazy... Tags: Israel, MiddleEast, Palestine, war |
Suburban Marxist and others, in comments, rightly ask this question:
When will Grodscorp post a statement condemning the Israeli atrocities currently underway in Gaza?
And while I can’t speak for Scott, John, Ant and others, the reason I haven’t posted or commented about it is this: I’ve just run out of things to say.
For a journalist attuned to world politics to say such a thing sounds lazy and evasive; and for a blogger to toy with irrelevant bottom-feeders like MK and Dr TingTong while staying silent on Israel and Palestine seems superficial to the point of silliness. But after years of writing, ranting and fuming about the limitless hatred and senseless murder that Israelis and Palestinians visit upon each other, it feels that every time I speak up or spill ink on the matter, I’m going over ground that I and a thousand people smarter than me have covered countless times before. So now I prefer to watch, wait and hope, rather than to write, rant and revile.
Don’t mistake my silence for indifference though. I’m a lifelong follower of this crisis, born shortly before the Yom Kippur War and raised in a house where every war and wave of aggression was discussed around the dinner table or the TV. I chose to study it at university (my tutor was one of those Israel-criticising Jews that right-wing bloggers love to portray as race-traitors). I visited Israel in 1998, where I found the people wonderful but the atmosphere so tense and uncomfortable that I cut a six-week visit down to four and left despairing that a solution was a generation away.
And that, by and large, has been my position since: one of despair. I despair for that part of the world and particularly its children, whose innocence is all too brief before they are infected by the pathological contempt Israelis and Palestinians feel for each other and for peace itself. I despair for the Israeli civilians who live each day in fear of Hamas rockets dropping on their homes and schools; and I despair for those killed and maimed by ever-disproportionate IDF retaliation. I despair for the leaders - Sadat, Rabin, Peres, Clinton and others - who worked so hard to forge a brittle peace; and I despair for those who frittered it away with their stubbornness and stupidity. And I despair for the world, condemned as it is by the shockwaves that radiate from this region: the malevolent shadow of al Qaeda, the abhorrent anti-Semitism rising in the Middle East and the threat of nuclear war on Iran.
Every new wave of conflict brings little that is new, it is just the same play in the same theatre with a different cast. Writers and bloggers finger-point and fulminate but new insights and attitudes are virtually absent. For some it’s just a further opportunity to vent the frothing bile of racism they ordinarily release in just a trickle. Some scour the media and the blogosphere, cherry-picking to support their ideological position or statements they can flag as support for terrorism or war crimes. The conspiracy theories and mental gymnastics that some will use to explain or justify dispossession, violence or murder is bewildering … they will condemn Hamas for firing rockets and mortars at civilians - and in the same breath explain away the bombing of a school as a legitimate military tactic. There is no better example of this than the treatment of Rachel Corrie after she was crushed to death by an IDF bulldozer in 2003; nothing on the Internet has upset or disgusted me more than the campaign of vilification since visited upon her.
So, while others at Grods will see it differently, that is my position. I choose to say little, feeling a little guilty for doing so - but I am watching closely nonetheless.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 12:33 pm #Scott
Couldn’t have said it better, Bridgit. I’ve simply got nothing to add that hasn’t been said before.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 12:43 pm #Bron
Me too. Beautifully said, Bridgit.
I also find that, because I more or less consider both sides to the conflict to be right and wrong, trying to be fair when someone is pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli just ends up going round in circles, repeating the same arguments as before. I condemn the actions of both sides, but I choose not to say anything these days. I, like Bridgit, am watching closely though.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 12:48 pm #THR
I agree that in addition to all of the pointless blood that has been spilt, much pointless ink has been similarly spilt.
The problem is, however, that this is not some symmetrical conflict in which one can say that each side is as bad as the other. Certainly, neither side is innocent, but one side is clearly being starved, blockaded, and colonised, whilst the other is not. This fact alone does not justify all of the actions of Hamas or the Palestinians, but it does make Palestinian resistance a necessity. I don’t believe that we should be afraid of calling this out.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 12:58 pm #Bridgit Gread
This fact alone does not justify all of the actions of Hamas or the Palestinians, but it does make Palestinian resistance a necessity. I don’t believe that we should be afraid of calling this out.
And I am not. That Palestinians have been deprived and have suffered more than Israelis is not in dispute; that there should be a Palestinian state - and a Palestinian resistance until it is achieved - is not in doubt.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 1:00 pm #Bridgit Gread
Bridgit: “I’ve just run out of things to say.”
Scott: “I’ve simply got nothing to add that hasn’t been said before.”
Bron: “I choose not to say anything these days.”
Blair post predicted: ‘LEFT LOST FOR WORDS’
Thursday 8 January 2009, 1:27 pm #Wah
Why should Grods condemn Israel? Why is it expected that a left wing blog would automatically take that line?
There are two sides to this conflict and both and the leadership in both have are a disgrace. Sadly it’s the innocent who suffer and both sides do their best to exploit their suffering.
You’ve summed it up beautifully Bridgit - it is about despair. Despair that compromise and commonsense can’t see through hawkish politics and revenge to end the cycle of violence. Why can’t both finds find a way to justify peace instead of using war as a chest-beating excercise.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 1:49 pm #Suburban Marxist
Thanks Bridgit for breaking the silence on this issue on Grods. I can sympathize with feelings of despair and the sense that there is nothing left to say although I find I am more in agreeance with your later statement…
“That Palestinians have been deprived and have suffered more than Israelis is not in dispute; that there should be a Palestinian state - and a Palestinian resistance until it is achieved - is not in doubt”.
…than with the sentiments in the original post that would seem to lay equal blame with both sides.
As such I agree with THR.
And in response to Wah would urge him to read the following post on Daily Kos as to why liberals/lefties should support the Palestinians in this struggle.
The I/P Conflict is Simpler than You Think [UPDATED]
by david mizner
Sun Jan 04, 2009 at 10:52:23 AM PST
“For progressives and liberals, I mean.
If you’re a centrist or a liberal hawk (an oxymoron if there ever was one), if you believe terrorism is the transcendent evil of our time, the issue might be complex and fraught with ambiguity.
But if you believe people have the right to be free, if your sympathies lie with the relatively weak, if you believe military occupation breeds extremity and terrorism, if you believe in peace through peace as opposed to peace through pummeling, you have a clear position on this issue whether you realize it or not.”
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/1/4/135223/2599/892/678482
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:02 pm #Bron
There was no “silence” on the issue on Grods, Sub. Marxist. It’s simply that there are at least 7 writers for Grods and for Grods to take a position that reflects all of our views would be impossible to do so. Likewise, for one of us to speak on behalf of all the Grodsters would be fraught with difficulties.
We can take the general line: that this fighting must stop immediately, both sides should talk seriously and try to come to a peaceful resolution — but that, I would assume, is what everyone is hoping for all the world over. And that doesn’t need a statement from Grods.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:04 pm #Luli
Great post Bridgit, a very eloquent and valid explanation on the topic. It just comes down to stopping the killing, we have to forget the blame.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:20 pm #Bridgit Gread
SM, the way I see it there are five immutable truths about the situation:
1. The area is homeland to both Jews and Palestinians
2. Israel has a right to exist as a free and independent state
3. Palestine has a right to exist as a free and independent state
4. These two states should have a right to choose their own governments
5. These two states should share the scarce resources of the region - water and arable land - equally
Everything that comes thereafter is contrived, convoluted bullshit that either furthers self-interest or continues old hatreds. The peace process has never been able to set them aside and thats why it has always failed. And both sides ARE equally to blame for its failure (Palestinian factionalism, corruption and Arafat’s pitiful back-down are all as notable as Israeli intransigence and heavy-handedness).
I have my views on the causes of the crisis but they do not interest me anywhere near as much as the solution, so I’m not going to join you in finger-pointing. Attributing blame for the situation simply perpetuates it. The angry Left telling the Palestinians they are oppressed and should feel righteous rage does no more good than those on the far Right cheering on the IDF’s bombing runs.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:35 pm #Milawe
“The angry Left telling the Palestinians they are oppressed and should feel righteous rage does no more good than those on the far Right cheering on the IDF’s bombing runs.”
There had to be a near overwhelming understanding and consensus that a white South Africa was unacceptable to most fair minded people before that country’s government changed. And just as people needed to be convinced both inside and outside of South Africa that the status quo was unjust, so to with Israel/Palestine.
The ‘angry left’ (as I assume you’re calling the Daily Kos poster, and SM) are continuing the tradition bringing an injustice to people’s attention (outside of Gaza and the West Bank) in an attempt to convince people that the situation isn’t murky or confused - but just plain unjust.
I doubt Palestinians need to be told that they are oppressed and I honestly don’t think that SM or the DK poster are attempting to do that.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:40 pm #Suburban Marxist
Fair enough Bron, now that I’m clear there isn’t a unified editorial position on Grods I understand why a statement wasn’t made.
I did expect though that one of the regular posters would say something and I’m glad Bridgit did. But to say that it wasn’t necessary on a left-wing blog, given the scale and brutality of the atrocity unfolding in Gaza, seems somewhat strange. Particularly given that the Grodsters were able to organise a contingent to attend an anti-Right to Life rally.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:40 pm #Bridgit Gread
Milawe, you’re claiming - on behalf of the Palestinians - that their cause is entirely just and that that of your ‘enemy’ is not. On that view we will just have to differ.
SM, if nobody else was saying it then I would; if I thought it would have an impact then I also would. A decade or more of experience has taught me that neither is true. The abortion thing, which was closer to home, was another issue and does not bear comparison.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:47 pm #Suburban Marxist
Bridgit, unfortunately your second point makes your third point unviable.
A two-state solution is an impossibility while the expansionist and militaristic Zionist state of Israel continues to exist.
Surely the solution lies in a democratic and secular Palestine where Jews and Arabs have equal rights and are allowed to practice their respective religions in freedom.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:54 pm #Bridgit Gread
Bridgit, unfortunately your second point makes your third point unviable.
A two-state solution is an impossibility while the expansionist and militaristic Zionist state of Israel continues to exist.
Just as Hamas’ charter, committing to the destruction of the state of Israel, makes the second point unviable. It’s the unwillingness of both sides to accept these principles that fouls the road to peace.
Surely the solution lies in a democratic and secular Palestine where Jews and Arabs have equal rights and are allowed to practice their respective religions in freedom.
Yes, but how practical would this be? I can see it becoming yet another sectarian quagmire like Lebanon.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 2:59 pm #albi
Well said. I don’t have a clue so say nothing.
I guess that’s a bit embarrassing.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 3:00 pm #John Surname
One of the problems the Nutosphere has yet to come to terms with, is that sympathising with the plight of the Palestinians does not equal supporting Hamas, or terrorism in general.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 3:03 pm #Bron
You really cannot compare a rally in Melbourne — where no lives were lost — and a war in the Middle East — where many lives are currently being lost, SM.
And it doesn’t need reminding that an anti-Right to Life “statement” akin to a “statement” on Gaza was never made. It was a turn-up-or-don’t-your-choice affair.
And quite frankly, WHY is Grods expected to make a statement? Why?
Grods is not expected to make a statement, are they, really? Individual Grodsters may do so, of course, as Bridgit has done, being clear that those are her opinions and hers alone. But why Grods as a whole? We’re just a small blog somewhere in the vast blogosphere. We have no political clout; Grods is not a political group or party. I don’t want to sound condescending by pointing out the obvious, it’s not my intention to sound condescending, but point it out, I must.
And as I said before, I think it could be reasonably assumed that the general position of Grods (and most people) is that this war sucks. Anything beyond that — such as “who started it” — is up to individual Grodsters to argue their position, but it would not — and should not — be a Grods “statement”.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 3:08 pm #Wah
I still don’t understand why Grods should be obliged to comment on any particular subject.
SM, I have sympathy for the Palestinian cause but not the methods of thugs like Hamas. I don’t see how you can divide this conflict into right v left whe Hamas are far right ultra-nationalists.
Milawe, the difference between Israel and South Africa is that the latter’s national security was not at stake by ending apartheid.
While many Israelis disagree with their country’s treatment of the Palestinians, they are also be concerned about suicide bombs and rocket attacks. The trouble is Israel has not learned the balance between protecting itself and continuing the cycle of violence and revenge - if there is a such a thing.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 3:09 pm #Suburban Marxist
I don’t agree that Palestinian intransigence (whether expressed by Hamas or any other faction) in the face of dispossession can be compared to the Zionist project’s expansionism as an obstacle on the road to peace.
As for the viability of a democratic and secular Palestine incorporating Jews and Muslims, there is a precedent for this as both faiths were able to co-habitate in the same locale more or less peacefully for generations.
I think the example of post-apartheid South Africa, while not ideal on many counts, is proof that a formerly dispossessed and persecuted indigenous population can achieve some form of equality without a tidal wave of revenge type extermination.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 3:18 pm #Suburban Marxist
“Grods is not expected to make a statement, are they, really? Individual Grodsters may do so, of course, as Bridgit has done, being clear that those are her opinions and hers alone.”
No Bron, they aren’t and I’ve already agreed with you there at #12.
I guess I was just surprised that none of the regular posters had published something regarding something as momentus and newsworthy as the situation in Gaza. And no Grods is not a political party but hell, we talk about politics all the time, don’t we?
“And as I said before, I think it could be reasonably assumed that the general position of Grods (and most people) is that this war sucks.”
Surely the position of most people is that the war sucks and so does the Israeli government for launching it?
“Anything beyond that — such as “who started it” — is up to individual Grodsters to argue their position…”…
And that’s what Bridgit did and what we are all getting the opportunity to do now, yeah?
Thursday 8 January 2009, 3:43 pm #Bron
Yes, you did agree with me at No. 12. But you also then went on to say:
“But to say that it wasn’t necessary on a left-wing blog, given the scale and brutality of the atrocity unfolding in Gaza, seems somewhat strange. Particularly given that the Grodsters were able to organise a contingent to attend an anti-Right to Life rally.”
…which to me — and I’m happy to be wrong — seemed to be saying that it was odd that we didn’t have a statement regarding Gaza, considering we made a “statement” regarding the anti-Right to Life rally (which we didn’t). So while you agreed, at the same time you still thought it was odd there was no statement.
But yeah, I see your point now.
And yes, we talk about politics all the time — but it doesn’t automatically follow that Grods should release a statement or take a position. (I know, I know, I’m repeating myself, but I fail to see how the fact politics is discussed on this blog means that a statement should be made. But now you see that there’s no reason for statement, so…).
Surely the position of most people is that the war sucks and so does the Israeli government for launching it?
The first half I agree with; the second half I would place caveats on; and even then, it’s such a complex issue, with a complex history and an equally complex present and future, so there is no way I can come down on one side and say “they started it first”. It’s not that simple.
And this is why I don’t talk about it anymore, because it’s all been said, over and over, here and elsewhere and, as Bridgit’s post is about, what’s left to say? You’ll disagree, someone else will agree, someone further will disagree, agree, disagree, agree, disagree, agree…
And in the meantime, while we’re pointing fingers at who is to blame and arguing among ourselves, children, women and men are being killed each day as the war rages on and it just seems so… pointless. We all just end up sounding like armchair warriors who have the answers to everything.
And then it starts all over again on another day.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 3:51 pm #Suburban Marxist
Ok. Here is something we can do, rather than just talk.
Rally & March
2pm Sunday 18 Jan
Victorian State Library
cnr Swanston St & La Trobe St, Melbourne
Stop the war on GAZA
Stop the massacre
End the siege now
No to Israel’s war crimes
Oppose the Australian government’s backing of Israel
Organised by Justice for Palestine. For more info call 0439 454 375 or 0418 819 548.
For those in Sydney…
Candlelight vigil for Gaza victims
Come and show your respect for the victims of Israel’s bombing and invasion of Gaza which has now resulted in the deaths of over 550 Palestinians.
This Thursday 8 January from 7pm & next Thursday 15 January
Sydney Town Hall
Thursday 8 January 2009, 4:09 pm #Bron
Don’t get me wrong, SM, talk about it all you want. I still read these things (and I’m certainly interested in what you have to say), but I guess my final point is: don’t be surprised if some people don’t want to say anything, or even have anything to say.
Thanks for the info on the candlelight vigil for Sydney, too.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 4:57 pm #Jason
On Wah’s point - I think it’s useful to get it out there, especially if the answer is “I don’t know - it’s tragic and complicated”. There are bloggers out there - News Ltd squadristi, hirsute bumpkins, not-quite-lawyers - whose tedious MO involves setting up a straw-man left that cheers “teh islamofascists” and carries around a copy of “An Invonvenient Truth” in its pocket. Registering a diversity of opinion gives the lie to this. And this very thread is evidence, if it were needed, that if you want to find “groupthinking” on Australian political websites, it won’t be here.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 5:26 pm #Wah
I think the example of post-apartheid South Africa, while not ideal on many counts, is proof that a formerly dispossessed and persecuted indigenous population can achieve some form of equality without a tidal wave of revenge type extermination.
That’s what Hamas needs to learn, which is why it is too simplistic to just side against Israel.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 7:05 pm #confessions
“One of the problems the Nutosphere has yet to come to terms with, is that sympathising with the plight of the Palestinians does not equal supporting Hamas, or terrorism in general.”
exactly, with the wingnuts its either black OR white. i’m actually surprised timmy hasn’t chosen to cover the conflict in his usual facile, thought-avoiding, black and white way. and I’m with Wah: why is this blog expected to cover every issue when there are multitude blogs out there from across political spectrum that have written about the attacks in great depth?
for what its worth though, nice work Bridgit.
:-)
Thursday 8 January 2009, 7:17 pm #Reuben
;;;; clearly believes it’s anti-semetic to condemn Israel for these attacks.
A ‘Den Relojo’ - over at Luli’s blog holds the absolutist position of ‘they’re scum. Period.’ which is the intellectual equivalent of suggesting that all Israelis are under the control of a sausage factory in Clayton.
Surname is right; we need to stop the absolutism before we get down to the heart of the conflict.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 8:14 pm #Jeremy
I’m with SM. I don’t think Bridgit’s points 2 or 3 should be acceptable to anyone in the modern world - the two state solution creates two racially and religiously discriminatory states right next to each other. Their kids will never learn to get on; you’ll just have two antagonistic camps throwing things over the border at each other. It’s not a long-term solution. And it’s not fair or just to the people within those borders, either - Jews and Muslims aren’t the only people living there. Since when are religious governments, governments that discriminate against anyone not sharing that religion, a good idea?
But then I wrote about that yesterday.
You need a strong commitment from the rest of the world to let this nascent democratic secular state establish itself, and strong constitutional protections to ensure that whichever group ends up in majority cannot oppress the minority, but it’s the only solution where in a generation or two you could get past the hatred.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 8:43 pm #Reuben
…the two state solution creates two racially and religiously discriminatory states right next to each other. Their kids will never learn to get on; you’ll just have two antagonistic camps throwing things over the border at each other.
I disagree. If the ethno-religious animosity is so fully entrenched into their respective cultures, then it’s unlikely that straight-out intermingling will do much other than create the formation of ghettos. That’s already the situation in East Jerusalem where - literally - Hami Bar Lev Boulevard separates two sides of Jersusalem.
And no, this isn’t good. Nobody wants segregation…but in this complex and emotionally-evocative case, it is an unavoidable consequence. Peace can exist with segregation (though obviously segregation is bad); that’s why we have international-borders.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 9:26 pm #Bridgit Gread
Jeremy, you are kidding yourself if you think that putting the red ants and the black ants into the same nest and crossing your fingers is going to work. All it will do is create a sectarianism mess where the government and military are factionalised and controlled by the strongest bloc, where a repressive form of economic apartheid continues to exist, where there is social division and urban ghettoisation, and where you can add intense nationalism and separatism to the other old gripes and grievances. It simply won’t last.
At least two separate states hostile to each other can be kept apart with borders and demilitarized zones. It has worked thus far with India-Pakistan, North-South Korea and others; it’s not an ideal solution for Israel-Palestine but it’s the best one on the horizon.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 9:31 pm #THR
Israeli Jews live in the West Bank, and Arabs live in Israel, so unless there’s a round of mass explusions, Jews and Arabs would have to endure each other in a two-state solution anyway. I don’t think a two-state solution would be one jot different to the current situation. You’d simply have two states that don’t recognise each other’s notional statehood.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 9:44 pm #Bridgit Gread
Yes, probably. But at least statehood would give a clearer picture of any future conflicts under international law, permitting a stronger and more thoughtful international response in the event of future aggression.
In the case of mixed populations, a two-states policy would require careful border-drawing and referenda to establish forms of government, allowing those who wished to relocate the opportunity to do so.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 11:28 pm #Suburban Marxist
We already have a two state solution.
And the current siege in Gaza is the result.
I think advocates of this solution neglect Israel’s role as the US mercenary in the region.
Any challenge to Western hegemony will be dealt with brutally by the Israeli state.
The Zionist elite and the US ruling class, are perfectly content with having a state that is constantly at war with its neighbours, as long as it is willing and able to serve the interests of the rich and powerful.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 11:44 pm #THR
I agree, SM - any Palestinian state would still be subject to incursions and blockade by Israel, and there’d be nothing much the Palestinians can do about it. A secular, democratic one state solution is the only sane path.
Thursday 8 January 2009, 11:56 pm #THR
At least this thread has disproven the myth of Grodskyite groupthink. No more are the Grodsthinkers merely the stooges to Ed’s Baader and Gread’s Meinhof. We are now factionalised!
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:27 am #Reuben
Yay!
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:35 am #Jeremy
FactionalisedFC doesn’t really work.
Friday 9 January 2009, 1:37 am #JT
I agree with Jeremy, THR and SM. The two-state solution will not work.
Friday 9 January 2009, 8:39 am #Toaf
Ha! Grodskyite! I love it.
Friday 9 January 2009, 11:30 am #Bridgit Gread
We already have a two state solution.
No, we do not. Gaza and the West Bank are part of Israel, its spoils from the Six-Day War; they have no sovereignty, no real autonomy and cannot be located on a world map. And, lately, whenever we have come close to any of these pre-requisites of statehood being fulfilled, the situation has been fouled by Hamas rockets and kidnapping.
Marxist claptrap about ‘Israel serving the wealthy elite’ or ‘the US being in thrall to Zionism’ adds nothing to the debate. Israel acts in its self-interest and the interest of its majority citizens, as all nations do. The two-state system would place constraints and conditions on Israeli expansionism and military responses from both sides - and its an inherently more achieveable proposition than expecting five million Jewish Israelis to politically assimilate with five million Arabs. Trust me, it will snow in the Sahara before that ever happens.
Friday 9 January 2009, 11:48 am #THR
Israel acts in its self-interest and the interest of its majority citizens, as all nations do.
This statement isn’t true of Australia, let alone Israel. Statehood and sovereignty are purely symbolic.
Friday 9 January 2009, 11:51 am #Bridgit Gread
Yes, Hamas takes that view too.
Friday 9 January 2009, 11:52 am #THR
‘Statehood’ doesn’t put food on the table, and it’s no guarantee of peace or prosperity. Ask the Iraqis.
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:06 pm #Jason
THR, Iraq also functions as a pretty sound example of the fate of quixotic attempts to force bitterly contending religious or ethnic groups into a single, inclusive, state. It has since its inception. I’m with Bridgit on this much at least - Israelis in particular are never, ever going to wear a one state solution there, not least because they’d be outnumbered almost from the gun. I don’t think it’s possible to wish away nationalism in general, or the bitter divide between these groups in particular. It’s also foolish to ask people to forget their own painfully recent history. Two states have a far better chance of co-existing without bloodshed than two groups fighting tooth and nail over the apparatus of a single state. Whether sovereignty is symbolic or not, the modern state’s monopoly on and capacity for violence - especially against its own population - are all too real. And whatever we may think, two states would also be a victory for Palestinians.
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:10 pm #Suburban Marxist
Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz in the early 1950s…
“The West is none too happy about its relations with states in the Middle East. The feudal regimes there have to make such concessions to the nationalist movements…that they become more and more reluctant to supply Britain and the United States with their natural resources and military bases…Therefore, strengthening Israel helps the Western powers maintain equilibrium and stability in the Middle East. Israel is to become the watchdog. There is no fear that Israel will undertake any aggressive policy towards the Arab states when this would explicitly contradict the wishes of the U.S. and Britain. But if for any reason the Western powers should sometimes prefer to close their eyes, Israel could be relied upon to punish one or several neighboring states whose discourtesy to the West went beyond the bounds of the permissible.”
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:12 pm #Suburban Marxist
Regarding the above quote, is Ha’aretz the newspaper of record for “Marxist claptrap”?
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:14 pm #Toaf
Permissible discourtesy. I might use that next time I’m in a bar brawl.
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:36 pm #Jason
SM, would you consider that a useful, contextualised explanation of what’s going on right now, 50 years later? Also, the rhetoric of “great and powerful friends” is a tub-thumpers stand-by - look at the way JWH used the “deputy sherrif” schtick. This can’t be read as prophecy *or* history.
If you ask me, US support for Israel is now entirely premised on domestic political considerations. They’ve long since been more trouble than they’re worth as an “Imperial beachhead” or whatever. And Israeli public opinion prevents the large-scale “punishment” of bigger arab neighbours, so they’re reduced to thumping Lebanon and murdering Palestinians rather than invading Syria or bombing Iran.
I think it’s better to try to understand what’s going on NOW, and actually try to think about workable solutions. Axe-grinding is only really good for sharpening axes.
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:41 pm #Bridgit Gread
Regarding the above quote, is Ha’aretz the newspaper of record for “Marxist claptrap”?
Do you think there are no Jewish Marxists, SM?
Friday 9 January 2009, 12:59 pm #Suburban Marxist
“SM, would you consider that a useful, contextualised explanation of what’s going on right now, 50 years later?”
Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.
“They’ve long since been more trouble than they’re worth as an “Imperial beachhead” or whatever.”
Then why has the US consistently supported Israel’s every major foreign policy decision up until the present moment and continue to supply it with billions of dollars of weaponry?
“And Israeli public opinion prevents the large-scale “punishment” of bigger arab neighbours, so they’re reduced to thumping Lebanon and murdering Palestinians rather than invading Syria or bombing Iran.”
How much larger a scale are you thinking of, nuclear weapons?
Friday 9 January 2009, 1:01 pm #Suburban Marxist
Not at all Bridgit. But I don’t think Ha’aretz is a Marxist paper by any stretch of the imagination.
Friday 9 January 2009, 1:05 pm #THR
“And Israeli public opinion prevents the large-scale “punishment” of bigger arab neighbours, so they’re reduced to thumping Lebanon and murdering Palestinians rather than invading Syria or bombing Iran.”
Israel has bombed Syrian targets several times in the past few years. And, despite media coverage to the contrary, Israel has done a lot more sabre-rattling in Iran’s direction than the other way around. There’s also the question of what exactly IDF troops were doing in Georgia last year…
Friday 9 January 2009, 1:16 pm #Jason
Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.
With respect, SM, that’s a bit facile. Even if we accept that history “repeats” iitself in any simple way (rather than occasionally resembling itself), that doesn’t mean it’s static - good Marxists should know that. Things have changed - that was written less than a decade after Israel formed. It doesn’t explain what’s happening now.
Then why has the US consistently supported Israel’s every major foreign policy decision up until the present moment and continue to supply it with billions of dollars of weaponry?
Again, I’d argue that this is mostly because it’s politically impossible for US politicians to do much else. US support now is less about any grand geopolitical strategy than it is about entrenched institutional and electoral support for Israel.
Again, though the support has been consistent, why assume that the reasons for it have stayed the same? It doesn’t follow.
How much larger a scale are you thinking of, nuclear weapons?
Maybe, at the outside. But there’s an obvious difference in scale and nature between the invasion of Gaza and, say, the Yom Kippur war. Israeli politicians now have to be very careful about public opinion at home, which isn’t necessarily hawkish. Just like the Grods readership, Israeli opinion is not monolithic.
By the way, I don’t think we’re disagreed about what Israel is currently doing in Gaza - I’ll be turning up to the Sydney rally. But I just don’t think the Chomsky/Pilger type line actually explains what’s going on in the Middle East.
Friday 9 January 2009, 1:21 pm #Jason
Israel has bombed Syrian targets several times in the past few years. And, despite media coverage to the contrary, Israel has done a lot more sabre-rattling in Iran’s direction than the other way around. There’s also the question of what exactly IDF troops were doing in Georgia last year…
Bombing targets is one thing, invasion is another. Sabre-rattling is one thing, military action is another. Syria has been invaded and Iran bombed in by Israel in the past. Compare the most recent invasion of Lebanon with the occupation during the 1980s. They are more constrained in what they can do. And that’s because US support for Israel is more qualified, and the Israeli people are sick of their children being conscripted to war.
Friday 9 January 2009, 1:48 pm #Bridgit Gread
Not at all Bridgit. But I don’t think Ha’aretz is a Marxist paper by any stretch of the imagination.
Ha’aretz is Israel’s version of The Age and is more inclined to publish a range of views than the others. You shouldn’t mistake or misrepresent one article as representative of its broad editorial policy.
Friday 9 January 2009, 2:45 pm #Suburban Marxist
“With respect, SM, that’s a bit facile.”
It was, a bit. But I was hungry and wanted to go for lunch.
;-)
However, these things tend to have a dynamic to them that is played out over a period of time. Israel’s foundation as a colonial-settler state in Palestine has mean’t it has proved itself useful to Western imperialism time and time again since its formation. That includes the present day with Israel able and willing to mete out punishment to any regime or movement (Hizbollah in Lebanon for example) that foils Western interests in the region.
This doesn’t mean of course that Israel is controlled from Washington and it can and has gone ‘off message’ in particular instances when its direct interests have clashed with those formulated in the Pentagon, Wall Street and the Whitehouse.
In general thought the interests of the two nations are broadly congruent and Israel has been prepared to take action when the US has considered the risks or costs potentially too high.
I also don’t think we need to be concerned at allegations of anti-semitism when making this analysis as Australia, as another colonial-settler state, also shares a similar relationship to the USA. The United States replaced Britain as the military power prepared to be Australia’s ‘big brother’ after the Second World War and guarantee its imperial adventures in the Asia-Pacific, provided it made regular downpayments on the insurance policy (Australian involvement in the Korean war, Malayan insurgency, Vietnam, hosting US bases at Pine Gap etc).
As for US support of Israel being the result of domestic political considerations, the Jewish population is approximately 2.2 % of the overall US population. Hardly a sizeable electorate.
“Maybe, at the outside. But there’s an obvious difference in scale and nature between the invasion of Gaza and, say, the Yom Kippur war.”
I can’t see the comparison here. In Yom Kippur Arab states invaded Israeli occupied territory.
“Just like the Grods readership, Israeli opinion is not monolithic.”
I never suggested it was and don’t appreciate the cheap shot.
Friday 9 January 2009, 2:48 pm #Suburban Marxist
“They are more constrained in what they can do.”
They are more constrained in what they can do because Hizbollah gave them a bloody nose in 2006.
Saturday 10 January 2009, 10:39 am #Jason
SM - I am a bit tied up and can’t respond at length just now but I just want to clarify:
I never suggested it was and don’t appreciate the cheap shot.
Sorry if I came across that way - honestly trying to have a civil debate about this. Not intended as a cheap shot.
Saturday 10 January 2009, 2:14 pm #Nickws
“I’m going over ground that I and a thousand people smarter than me have covered countless times before”
There’s only 1000 people smarter than you, Bridgit!?
Impressive.
But seriously, Grods should give itself a pat on the back for putting up a thread about Gaza where douchery _doesn’t_ poison everything.
Lot of madness out there, too many people think flamings-bags-of-shit have been left on their porches by the events on the other side of the world. Taking it very _personal_.
Monday 12 January 2009, 10:33 am #Toaf
Suburban, have you read Alan Woods’ piece on Gaza?
Monday 12 January 2009, 10:44 am #Suburban Marxist
Thanks Toaf, I’ll have a look at that.