Any time anybody criticizes U.S. policy in Israel or Palestine, I wonder what plausible alternative they would propose.
It's a horrible, intractable situation in which everyone involved believes - pretty rationally - that their ends are often best served by violence.
I can think of some plausible alternatives to the policy described by Karon.
the US trying to subvert Palestinian democracy
That wouldn't exactly take a whole lotta subvertin'.
The American policy failure is not a current one. Chomsky and Ashkar have an interesting perspective - one that should be read in Washington and Tel Aviv.
#1: everyone involved believes - pretty rationally - that their ends are often best served by violence.
I submit that the Palestinians' ends are ill served by violence. A Gandhi approach would've got them a state decades ago. Instead, they have, first under Arafat and now under... well, nobody, kept up an endless series of tactically and strategically meaningless attacks that gain them nothing, impoverish their people, and only serve to generate ill will and retaliation.
Before this goes the way of all threads concerning things Palestinian, I want to second Karon's recommendation of the excellent and illuminating piece by Hussein Agha and Robert Malley in the NYRB.
Meanwhile, Hillary is already exhibiting strong, decisive leadership on the campaign trail.
Gaijin, it is also understandable that years of deprivation leads to frustration and radicalization in a part of the world where the only solution is usually a violent one. Blame should not be heaped solely on the Palestinians; the Americans and Israelis deserve a fair share. There were many lost opportunities ... with fault belonging to all sides.
I'm not saying the violence isn't understandable, I'm simply saying the Palestinians' ends are not "best served" by it.
I made a fair effort to drag the thread off-topic in #7.
A Gandhi approach would've got them a state decades ago
Hey look, I agree with Gaijin Biker on something!
Seriously, there are hard cases for nonviolence. Palestine is not one of them.
Ignore the AIPAC angle for a moment, The current admin does what it does,based on broad conceptions of loyalty: if they've defined Dahlan as part of their movement they will go to the mat for them until it becomes a liabi;ity. N/M the Israeli national interest, Dahlan is political ally, therefore their goals are ours.
Any time anybody criticizes U.S. policy in Israel or Palestine, I wonder what plausible alternative they would propose.
MANDOM!!!
And likewise, IMO, the Israelis' ends are not best served by holding onto the territory taken in '67.
"with the US trying to subvert Palestinian democracy"
As Gandhi said about Western civilization....
"and install an autocrat you probably haven't heard of"
If someone hadn't heard of Mohammed Dahlan by 1987, or at least 1993, they're demonstrably incapable of having an informed opinion about any Palestinian or Israeli matters. (Or, at best, if they suddenly took up the topic last year, from a blank slate, and studied even a few pages of briefing on Palestine and Israel, and still didn't know who Dahlan is, same deal: it would be evidence of huge overwhelming ignorance at such a basic level that the person in question wouldn't know enough to tell one bit of context from another.)
"And likewise, IMO, the Israelis' ends are not best served by holding onto the territory taken in '67."
Of course.
or at least 1993, they're demonstrably incapable of having an informed opinion about any Palestinian or Israeli matters
So no American under the age of 25 or so, you're saying?.
"So no American under the age of 25 or so, you're saying?"
Since I specifically discussed the alternative in the next sentence, I don't think that would be the best possible reading, no.
But this sort of thing isn't productively argued. Everyone is free to disagree with my point, and anyone is free to argue that they can be clueless as to who Dahlan is, and still know what they're talking about. I won't be around to further argue with them, though.
Ah, that's easy. Dahlan was that guy Billy Crystal was always talking to on old SNL skits, right? You know, when he would say, "Dahlan, you look maaavelous!"
"A Gandhi approach would've got them a state decades ago."
But it seems pretty clear that "a state" is not an end that the Palestinian people support - if that's what they wanted, they could have taken it when it was (more or less) offered.
"the Israelis' ends are not best served by holding onto the territory taken in '67."
And again, I see this as questioning Israeli ends, not Israeli means. They want to keep that real estate.
As in many things, Bush has taken about the stupidest possible approach in Israel/Palestine, but it's hard to see how a smarter approach would lead to a better result.
"As in many things, Bush has taken about the stupidest possible approach in Israel/Palestine, but it's hard to see how a smarter approach would lead to a better result"
So pushing both sides towards something like the Geneva Accords couldn't possibly have worked? Abbas wouldn't have jumped at an offer like that if the Israeli government could have been persuaded and/or pressured into making it? There are absolutely no Israelis who would support such a solution either, I guess. And the majority of the Palestinians (who seem willing to accept a two state solution) would all prefer to live in abject misery cheering for suicide bombers, no doubt.
And when Hamas won the election, a concerted attempt to undermine the government, cause intense suffering among ordinary Palestinians and support the most corrupt alternative didn't, of course, have any discernible harmful effect.
Yeah, sure, nothing that's happened since 2001 could have happened differently.
22: Five strawmen in three paragraphs, that may be a new world record.
I prefer his earlier work.
It's always delightful when Gary drops in, isn't it?
That was actually funny, albeit snotty--the strawman comment I mean, not the silly link to my namesake. In my defense the target I was aiming at wasn't very clear. Bush is terrible, but it was going to be terrible no matter what. Gotta give me something to work with or I go for strawmen.
What a site this is: an Israeli/Palestinian post gets twenty five hits while 150+ debate the merits of knife class as a dating service.
Mostly we've learned to ignore the Israel/Palestine threads entirely. I only clicked on this by mistake.
The real action is still in the sexism and pop culture threads.
And popsicles. Everyone likes popsicles.