NOVANEWS
- Right of return and international law– why the Clinton Parameters are a problem
- Judge Goldstone barred from grandson’s bar mitzvah
- The war among the Israelis over settlements
- NYT: Obama ‘incensed’ by Netanyahu
- Follow the Berkeley divestment debate live
- ‘Forward’: Finkelstein has a ‘disease’
Right of return and international law– why the Clinton Parameters are a problem
Noam Sheizaf, an Israeli journalist who blogs at Promised Land , has a post up supporting the idea of an Obama administration imposed “peace plan” based (at least as a starting point) on the “Clinton Parameters” and disagrees with my negative assessment of the plan. He raises good points that should be debated and talked about, and the issues Sheizaf raises are ones that divide those on the political left who care about bringing an end to the Israeli occupation and seeing justice for Palestinians.
First, Sheizaf says:
If the “Clinton Parameters” were to serve as a starting point, as Sheizaf states, what would an end point be? It’s not hard to imagine that if the base of negotiations start with a proposal that is already, in my opinion, unfair and unjust for Palestinians, then any agreement coming out of that would be even more unfair.
There is no equivalency between the claim that “Greater Israel” belongs to the Jewish People only, and the Palestinian refugees’ right to return. Why? Again, look at international law: there is no enshrined right for Jews to settle in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. There is an enshrined, legal right for Palestinians to return.
I don’t think this is “absurd.” If we’re talking about a demilitarized Palestinian state, why should Israel have any type of military presence within the West Bank? Of course, I understand that these things take time. But it’s a legitimate concern to have, and we should question why Israel should reserve the right to maintain a military presence while Palestinians wouldn’t have a military under the “Clinton Parameters.” |
Judge Goldstone barred from grandson’s bar mitzvah
Many of you have already read this news from JTA:
For myself, I can only say that this hurts my heart, I want to reach out to Jewish friends today who reject this hateful edict. The crisis of Israel is a crisis for Jewish communities around the world. The Israeli crisis, and this news, demonstrate what we have always tried to talk about, and that Walt and Mearsheimer addressed: the Diaspora is essential to the Israeli state, and any hedge on that support is perceived as an assassination. (This is also J Street’s problem.) |
The war among the Israelis over settlements
Here is an interesting poll by the Truman Institute showing that Israeli public opinion has shifted somewhat against the settlements:
So the good news is that Obama taps his foot, and it has an effect. Think if he put his foot down! How much would it take Netanyahu gov’t to fall? The other news is that the numbers are starkly different among the Jewish settlers. They are overwhelmingly against dismantling, and more than half of them favor some form of resistance to such an order.
It reminds me of what Micha Kurz of Grassroots Jerusalem told me a while back, the real battle is between the Jewish dispossessors of the Palestinians and those who want to live with the Palestinians. The coexistence Jews will win in the end, but how long will that be? |
NYT: Obama ‘incensed’ by Netanyahu
The Times seems to be dealing with the embarrassment of Ethan Bronner by having Helene Cooper report on shifts in Obama’s policy on Middle East from Washington. This is a really good report from her (and Mark Landler) yesterday, saying flatly that Obama was “incensed” by Netanyahu’s East Jerusalem plans and their announcement when Joe Biden was in J’lem.
The piece also highlights the important but obvious Petraeus doctrine, that the Israel/Palestine problem is hurting the U.S. across the Islamic world and costing lives too. Typically, the Times quotes three Israel lobbyists, Martin Indyk, Rob’t Wexler and Ronald Lauder. I wish it would quote some Arabs or Palestinians. Related posts:
|
Follow the Berkeley divestment debate liveThe Berkeley Student Senate will be reconsidering divestment tonight and could possibly overturn Student President’s veto of the divestment bill. Jewish Voice for Peace will be live tweeting the proceedings and you can follow their reports below. You can also follow the #ucbdivest hashtag if you’re on twitter. Also, below the twitter feed is a document that JVP has compiled of notable endorsements of the divestment action. Update: The JVP twitter account below reached its limit overnight and JVP reports were moved to jvplive2. It seems after over 12 hours of debate the motion to overturn was tabled and will be reconsidered later. From the JVP twitter feed: “Motion is tabled!!!! this means no winners or losers. Veto was not sustained or overturned. Finally.” Jewish Support for Divestment from Israeli Occupation at UC BerkeleyRelated posts: |
‘Forward’: Finkelstein has a ‘disease’
Also, he hates himself and those who made him, is a bruised apple, and full of poison, and in the grip of of a great force that is compelling him to do and say strange things– all from Mark Cohen’s review of the documentary, American Radical, in the Forward, which is thoughtfully titled, “A Jewish Frankenstein.”
Cohen says it’s all because his parents survived the Holocaust. I agree, Finkelstein has some mishigoss because of the Holocaust. And he’s alone? How mean. Related posts: |
See: www.mondoweiss.net