The Test
Steve Clemons has a smart post on the Hamas-Israel mutual bombardment as the “test by crisis” moment Joe Biden was talking about before the election:
Part of what is going on today with Israel Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s unleashing of massive Israeli airpower against Hamas offices in Gaza is a test of Obama’s America. Hamas’s decision to end its “lull”, or temporary ceasefire with Israel, also has a lot to do with testing the U.S. and seeing what the outlines of Obama’s policy will be.
Barack Obama cannot afford to allow his presidency and its foreign policy course to be hijacked by either side in this increasingly blurry dispute.
I think that for a lot of people on the transition, the instinctive response to this is going to be to cause people to flinch from the idea of a serious effort at peacemaking. It’s a stark reminder that getting there wouldn’t just involve a nice meeting where you ask everyone to be reasonable. But I think you’d have to consider that kind of retreat to caution to be a flunking of the test.
41 Responses to “The Test”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
December 28th, 2008 at 11:01 am
We all know what the result of the “test” will be: no change. Obama and Clinton will continue full support for Israel with no condition whatsoever, will condemn Hamas and mostly sit on their hands for 4/8 years. Maybe a nice speech about peace and freedom somewhere.
It will be more interesting to see if US policies on Syria or Iran change, since that is possible at least.
December 28th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Can I not care about this? I’ve been wondering for a while. Why does violence between two extremely small and quite frankly insignificant economic blocs gather this much interest? Someone asked me yesterday what I thought of the Israel-Palestine 50 year old ruckus, and I replied that I just don’t care because neither people is really important in the grand scheme of things. Is that ok?
December 28th, 2008 at 11:20 am
I’m not sure I know what passing the test would look like. A nice meeting where we ask everyone to be reasonable?
December 28th, 2008 at 11:30 am
MY, what deal do you see that the US can push for will stick with Hamas and Israel? I’d be happy to see the US push for it, if I had any hope it existed. Otherwise it is all in the ‘lets be reasonable for public relations purposes but it won’t happen anyway’ category. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but if that is what you’re calling for please let us know. And eventually, after quite a bit of water has gone under the bridge, something might stick. But in the next few years? Do you actually see a deal sticking?
December 28th, 2008 at 11:34 am
yazık okadar ınsana kıyıldıı yazık
December 28th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Can I not care about this?
If you lived in say, China that would make sense.
Assuming you are an American, no, you need to make a call. The answer to the question: Why the fuck are we fighting with Muslims?, is all wrapped up at the core about Palestine.
December 28th, 2008 at 11:49 am
It’s not that I don’t care, it’s that it doesn’t make any difference whether I do or not. The Oslo peace accords didn’t make any difference, Clinton’s last shot at peace didn’t make any difference, and Bush was incapable of making a difference. All the talk and pressure in the world won’t make a difference now. So the only point I can see to this “test” is whether or not we can still reflexively repeat the same old tired lines that have been repeated again and again and again for years. Which we already are.
December 28th, 2008 at 11:51 am
How is it that the end of the Cold War didn’t make Israel-Palestine irrelevant? I suppose AIPAC could answer that question.
December 28th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Ask this: Who on Obama’s foreign policy team, save perhaps for Obama himself, has any credibility on both sides of the conflict, and is well-positioned to take the lead on pushing for an Israeli-Palestinian peace? No one that I can see. Jones? Maybe a tiny bit, but not much.
I usually don’t go for the big “special commission” approach, because it usually strikes me as a way of passing the buck and kicking the issue down the road. But in this case, there are no alternatives, since Obama has not put a team in place that can handle this issue on its own. I think Obama needs to convene an advisory panel filled with scholars and ex-government types with a history of experience in working the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The panel should represent a broad spectrum from noted friends of Israel on one end to noted friends of Arabs and Palestinians on the others, with centrists in between. I think something like the following lineup would be appropriate:
Martin Indyk
Zbigniew Brzezinski
James Zogby
Dennis Ross
Rashid Khalidi
Robert Malley
Michael Oren
George Mitchell
Jimmy Carter
Michael Lerner
James Baker
Elie Wiesel
Obama should ask Carter to chair the panel. He is still associated in much of the world, and here at home, with actual progress in the cause of Middle East peace. This will piss of a loud minority of anti-Carter activists in the pro-Israel camp, but these angry smear artists need to be nudged to the curb.
December 28th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Oh, we could make a massive difference. If the incoming administration said “Fuck this. Get your ass back behind the green line or you are on your own, no more military support, no more cover at the U.N., etc…” That would be the end of all this.
In the real world, congress would probably freak out and climb all over each other to shovel guns at the Israeli’s in a bipartisan and veto-proof frenzy but that’s not the same as saying America couldn’t stop all this. It may be politically impossible but that’s not the same thing.
December 28th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Do you really think a main cause of these attacks is a desire to test the US? I think that internal Israeli electoral politics are a much more significant cause. Frankly, it’s a bit arrogant to view everything that happens in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict through the lens of “how is this related to US policy?”
December 28th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
MikeF makes a lot of sense to me. In fact, one could see it as an effort not to test Obama but, by starting so far in advance of his inauguration, presenting him with a fait accompli.
December 28th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
I think it’s a combination of both. While Israeli domestic politics are their own distinct thing, of which the American public has only the faintest understanding, a test of any potential Israeli government in its appeal to the electorate is its capacity to do something really fucking stupid and have Washington nod sagely towards it.
Of course, this is why Biden was right, albeit in his clumsy way, to talk about ‘tests’ for an incoming administration. There’s a lot of calibrating going on.
December 28th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
I think “test” is the wrong language here. When people talk about testing a new leader, I take it they are talking about violating some border, boarding a ship, forcing down a plane or otherwise provocatively probing the boundaries that define the fluid status quo, just to see how the leader new will react and manage the crisis. Does he shoot first, talk first, respond quickly, respond deliberately? Which advisers does he rely on most? Does he try anything clever or creative, or does he play it by the book?
But until that leader has actual control of his country’s government, you can’t test him by launching a provocative foray, because his options are too limited.
Nevertheless, I do think the timing of this operation, and the pattern of Israeli activity leading up to it over the past several months, mainly keeping the screws tight on the Gaza lockdown, is likely in part related to the US political situation. The point isn’t to test Obama, but to determine the environment he will be faced with, and limit the options he will have, when he takes office.
December 28th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Obama has been brought to power by whose money? criminal JEWS! Do you think he has balls to say shit to Israelis? He has surrounded himself by thugs: Rahm Emmanuel, Axlrod, etc.
Obama is a pussy.
December 28th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Can I not care about this? I’ve been wondering for a while. Why does violence between two extremely small and quite frankly insignificant economic blocs gather this much interest?
There are a number of reasons why this particular conflict gets more attention than your average border dispute:
1. It takes place in the Middle East, a strategically important location.
2. It takes place in what three major world religion consider to be the “Holy Land.”
3. It is largely seen in terms of Christians/Jews vs. Muslims, and is a cause celebre throughout the Muslim world and a major engine behind Muslim anti-Americanism.
4. It involves the world’s one and only Jewish state, and Jews are “over-represented” in the American media and political establishment.
5. Palestinian groups have historically been very media-savvy.
6. Israel has nukes.
And probably others I’m not thinking of.
December 28th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
“Can I not care about this? I’ve been wondering for a while. Why does violence between two extremely small and quite frankly insignificant economic blocs gather this much interest?”
If you are American you should because unconditionally supporting an illegal state has dire consequence for your country. Don’t come bitching like an old harlot when you pay the price for supporting thugs i.e. zionists.
December 28th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
This conflict is a historical conflict, American support is Truman era historical support. Americans need to care about this now because if the Bush administration is willing to blindly offer up our unconditional support to Israel without restraint, it may negatively affect American diplomatic relations. Israel is in no way bound to keep American interests in mind as they continue this conflict, and that may be damning for US-Arab relations. Hopefully the changing of the guard will bring with it a clearer understanding that Israel is a military power on its own, and has its own agenda, neither of which are an American responsibility anymore.
December 28th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Re Tom
Mr. Tom is the son of a whore.
December 28th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
And SLC is the son of an inbred mongoloid?
December 29th, 2008 at 7:46 am
I object to insulting inbred mongoloids!
SLC is a Zionist freakazoid – which is much smarter, but socially much worse, than an inbred mongoloid. A mongoloid can’t help itself.
A Zionist freakazoid just needs to be killed.
It’s time to take Israel OUT. Don’t just abandon Israel to its own devices – it would use that to exterminate the Palestinians even more violently. The same with the stupid “two-state solution” – Israel would merely use that to justify “war” – instead of simple genocide – with the Palestinian state.
The international community through the UN needs to reverse everything that has happened since 1947. Dissolve Israel as a state, disarm its nuclear arsenal, and replace it with a Palestinian state with full civil rights for everybody, Arab and Jew.
And if Israel doesn’t like it, turn Israel into Iraq.
December 29th, 2008 at 8:00 am
Re Richard Steven Hack
Mr. Hack, the blogs resident ex-con who advocates the assassination of police officers but, when he had the opportunity, wimped out and surrendered meekly, advocates turning Israel into Iraq. Apparently, the fact that some 1 million Arabs live there and would be killed in any such invasion bothers him not at all. I have a flash for Mr. Hack. It ain’t going to happen.
Re Tom
I have to apologize for calling fuckface Tom the son of a whore. Calling him the son of a whore is an insult to honest, hardworking prostitutes.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:17 am
My, what a civil thread.
I really don’t see this as a situation of Obama being put to the test. What exactly can Obama do before he takes office. It would appear to me that Israel drives the situation. If Obama denounces the Israeli action, he’ll be punished for it. But really, this is the only fluid option. If Obama supports it, then its merely status quo. If Obama remains silent, he’ll piss off both sides, but not too much. Finally, Israel’s actions will have no real effect on the geopolitics of the region. So really, I see this as meaningless.
The far better question is ‘why should we care?’
Yes, Israel has nukes but it’s unlikely to use them on the Gaza strip or west bank. It has no reason to use nuclear weapons on Jordan or Egypt with whom it has friendly relations. No reason to use nuclear weapons on Saudi Arabia or oil producing states. It’s only possible targets are Syria and Iran who pose no threat and frankly, that gets us into different directions.
Israel has been a significant cause of Anti-Americanism in the Arab world, but let’s face it. Over the last 40 years America has given Arabs a great many more reasons to despise it, and the whole Iraq and Afghanistan thing probably makes Israel pretty insignificant.
The Palestinians, despite endless efforts to demonize them, are pretty much the mellow stoners of terrorism and insurgent resistance. Let’s face it, they don’t really hold a candle to folks like the Sinn Fein or the Chechens. They’re also not particularly media savvy. Really, in the media front, it’s more Israel’s ceaseless brutality rather than any political or media acumen that has made the Palestinians case.
It’s also not that big an issue for the Muslim world. Sure, it’s a great coffee table subject. But tut tutting in the souk is one thing, actually doing stuff is another. In the last 30 years no Arab state has made the investments or shown the political will to challenge Israel. Wake up – we’re not paying 200 a barrel for oil. When Iraq turned itself into a war machine, it went after Iran and Kuwait. When Libya turned itself into a mini-war machine it tussled with Chad and Egypt.
The bottom line is that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is no more important than the annual football playoffs. It’s theatre for most of us. American Jews root for Israel, powerless Arabs empathise with the Palestinians. The actual effect on the world economy or political alignment is zero. The actual price paid or investment made by those outsiders is minimal. And for those in the actual crux of the situation, nothing ever changes.
If you believe in God, then this is merely one of God’s sadistic jokes.
December 29th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Re skeptic
If you believe in God, then this is merely one of God’s sadistic jokes.
Somehow, I don’t think that Israelis and Palestinians are laughing.
December 29th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Sure they are, SLC. You’re just not paying attention. Because, you know, if it wasn’t funny, they wouldn’t be doing it. Surely you don’t think human beings would inflict this hell on earth on each other for serious and just purposes. What Israeli could justify a missile attack that blows an innocent little girl to pieces? What Palestinian could seriously contemplate launching a dangerous missile? How could the Israeli people virtuously embark on the starvation of the people of Gaza? It’s all a joke.
Don’t you think it’s funny? After all, you’re sitting there safe and fat and content, looking at unending and insoluble horror. A moral man would weep. A just man would rage. A saintly man would express compassion.
But you? In the face of horror, you’re a cheerleader. You treat it like the Yankees vs the Dodgers. You wave a pennant! Go Jews! I can only assume that you find it all hilarious, and that the screams of burning children are music to your ears.
I respect you for it. Really.
December 29th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
SLC is an old paranoid jew who’s afraid of his own shadows. These people should be institutionalized in a maximum security prisons.
December 29th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Re Skeptic
No Mr. Skeptic, I don’t think it’s funny at all and I don’t treat the conflict as the Yankees vs the Dodgers (or more appropriately in the Washington DC area, the Deadskins vs the Cowboys). As I have previously stated, this conflict has been going on for 100 years and looks good for another 100 (let’s recall that the Catholics and the Protestants in Ireland fought intermittently for 300 years). The fact is that much of the fuel driving the conflict is the thirst for oil in the industrialized world (the reason the US is in Iraq). If the Middle East didn’t have any oil, nobody would give a flying fuck about what goes on there and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict would have been resolved long ago.
Re Farid
Mr. Farid apparently doesn’t read Mr. pseudonymous in ncs’ comments. According to him, I’m not Jewish.
December 29th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Oh don’t be bashful, SLC. Of course you do.
Otherwise, I’d have to take your nonsense seriously. A hundred year conflict? Mmmmm. Really now, that’s childish and apocalyptic, at once.
Who is the war against? Hamas? Hamas dates back to 1987. Did we spend 80 years warring in anticipation of Hamas? I don’t think so. Then who? Fatah? Don’t make me laugh. They certainly weren’t in control of the intifada, it took them by surprise. The Intifada? Yeah, a modern industrial society is warring on a bunch of 13 year old boys with rocks.
The fact that you talk about it in these apocalyptic hundred year war (and going on for another hundred years) betrays your ignorant but bloodthirsty outlook. It is a sports contest for you. It’s all ‘us versus them, rah rah rah.’ And that’s as deep as your analysis ever goes.
And as for your assertion that if the middle east didn’t have oil the palestinian/israeli conflict would have been resolved long ago…. Really, pure comedy. Because obviously the Palestinians are major oil moguls, right. And if there were no oil the Palestinians would… what? Kill themselves? Evaporate? Vanish into the ether? ROTFL.
December 29th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Oh, SLC: I simply make the assumption that you’re as Jewish as Matt’s bike, because I have no evidence to the contrary from you. You’re certainly as observant as Matt’s bike. And still a fucking Kahanist, though.
December 29th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Well, as our new Vice President said, you don’t have to be Jewish to be a Zionist.
You just have to be an asshole.
And why would the one million Arabs in Israel have a problem with a US invasion? It’s the asshole Israelis who would be shooting at US troops, not the Arabs. Of course, the same asshole Israelis would be shooting at the Arabs, too, so they might have a problem there.
Actually no invasion is needed. Just institute a world wide boycott of Israeli goods and blockade their ports and airports. End of Israel’s economy in ninety days. That stinking little country couldn’t survive as long as the Gazans have with no fuel or medical supplies.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:35 am
levitraVery interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 11th, 2009 at 4:57 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 12th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
Incredible site!
March 14th, 2009 at 5:43 am
Incredible site!
xanax
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:25 am
tramadol
It is the coolest site,keep so!
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:34 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:21 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 7:08 am
thanks !! very helpful post! viagra