The Atlantic Jeffrey Goldberg had an interview with recently sworn-in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and reports:
Netanyahu to Obama: Stop Iran [from gaining nuclear weapons]—Or I Will
While this is not surprising in the least coming from the hawkish, right-wing politician, it’s a little pathetic to hear him say the following:
“The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons…”
Excuse me for saying so Mr. Prime Minister, but frak you. As an American who campaigned and voted for Barack Obama, I think I have more of an idea, and a say, in what the Obama Presidency’s “great missions” are. It’s idiotic enough to say that the Obama Presidency has “two” great missions, and goes to show Netanyahu’s lack of understanding of a) the Obama Campaign and b) the Obama Administration. Frankly, although one could argue that preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is on the agenda, but to name it one of the administration’s “two great missions” goes too far.
To be fair, in the same interview, Netanyahu did state that he was open to diplomatic means to prevent such a thing from happening. But his basic stance is, “by any means necessary”, and it’s obvious that he wants to try military means before ever attempting diplomacy. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s my understanding that if military means are sought and attempted before diplomatic ones, that the diplomatic ones will become practically impossible.
Many people might not know this, but in 1971, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat offered Israel a treaty, a peace deal. Israel decided to reject the offer in favor of expansionism. A peace deal with Egypt would have granted a large amount of security for Israel, giving it an ally with which they could leverage other states in the Middle East. Let us not forget that relations with Egypt over the last thirty years could have very well led to better relations with the rest of the Middle East. But that didn’t happen. There’s not really any reason to get bogged down in what-ifs. The overall point here is this, though: Israel has not acted rationally for three decades on the issue of international relations, and is pushing itself further and further to the right, and towards a grounding such irrational and failed policies. And let’s be clear: Benjamin Netanyahu’s election over that of Tzipi Livni cements such policies and ideas not only in the way Israel conducts itself internationally, but also domestically.
Good luck, Israel. You’re gonna need it.
March 31, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Excuse Me, Mr. Prime Minister, But Frak You
The Atlantic Jeffrey Goldberg had an interview with recently sworn-in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and reports:
While this is not surprising in the least coming from the hawkish, right-wing politician, it’s a little pathetic to hear him say the following:
Excuse me for saying so Mr. Prime Minister, but frak you. As an American who campaigned and voted for Barack Obama, I think I have more of an idea, and a say, in what the Obama Presidency’s “great missions” are. It’s idiotic enough to say that the Obama Presidency has “two” great missions, and goes to show Netanyahu’s lack of understanding of a) the Obama Campaign and b) the Obama Administration. Frankly, although one could argue that preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is on the agenda, but to name it one of the administration’s “two great missions” goes too far.
To be fair, in the same interview, Netanyahu did state that he was open to diplomatic means to prevent such a thing from happening. But his basic stance is, “by any means necessary”, and it’s obvious that he wants to try military means before ever attempting diplomacy. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s my understanding that if military means are sought and attempted before diplomatic ones, that the diplomatic ones will become practically impossible.
Many people might not know this, but in 1971, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat offered Israel a treaty, a peace deal. Israel decided to reject the offer in favor of expansionism. A peace deal with Egypt would have granted a large amount of security for Israel, giving it an ally with which they could leverage other states in the Middle East. Let us not forget that relations with Egypt over the last thirty years could have very well led to better relations with the rest of the Middle East. But that didn’t happen. There’s not really any reason to get bogged down in what-ifs. The overall point here is this, though: Israel has not acted rationally for three decades on the issue of international relations, and is pushing itself further and further to the right, and towards a grounding such irrational and failed policies. And let’s be clear: Benjamin Netanyahu’s election over that of Tzipi Livni cements such policies and ideas not only in the way Israel conducts itself internationally, but also domestically.
Good luck, Israel. You’re gonna need it.
March 31, 2009 at 1:29 pm Leave a comment