Gaza and Domestic Politics: A Reader Comments

A reader from Turkey has offered these shrewd observations. I don't think Israeli domestic politics is the primary motive for the operation --- remember, it was planned back in June --- but it is a supporting reason that may have accelerated the Israeli attack.


Would you agree with me that I think the basic stimulus behind the ongoing Israeli operations in Gaza is beyond the worries growing out of the terrorist attacks of Hamas and the weariness of these rockets into the Israeli territory? It is basically an internal problem. As Netanyahu, Livni and Barak are going to run for the elections in February, each of them are trying to show more decisiveness in responding attacks. And each move is pulling others to come into a harder-line position which brings the Israeli politics into a vicious circle.



Secondly, this has been a an important test for the Obama administration. His pro-Israeli discourses (which have been one of the most pro-Israeli discourses since George W. Bush) were tested and Obama has not stated any seriously negative comment for the operation in Gaza. Moreover, this operation probably made some neocons really happy cause they are going to leave a bomb in the Middle East in Democrats' hands.

The ongoing economic crisis and the Middle Eastern issue are going to put pressure on the Obama administration and the more pressure Obama feels on his shoulders, the more public support Republicans get with the "necessities" of the "significance of the war on terrorism" and "the importance of Israel" as a strategic ally for the US. As a result, the Obama administration will be bound to draw its line closer to conservative perceptions.

On 'Barack The Magic Negro'

The Washington Post has a nice summary of 'Barack The Magic Negro', which Republican National Committee chair candidate Chip Saltsman distributed to potential supporters on a Christmas CD:

The song, written by conservative satirist Paul Shanklin and aired repeatedly on Rush Limbaugh's radio show last year, is sung in the imagined voice of the Rev. Al Sharpton to the tune of the old Peter, Paul and Mary song "Puff the Magic Dragon." It was inspired by a March 2007 column in the Los Angeles Times by David Ehrenstein, an African American writer who sought to place Mr. Obama's candidacy in the larger context of what he called "the magic Negro," an idealized figure who assuages liberal guilt and fulfills white Americans' desire for "a noble, healing Negro." Mr. Shanklin took the column and ran: "Barack the Magic Negro lives in D.C./The L.A. Times, they called him that/'Cause he's not authentic like me./Yeah, the guy from the L.A. paper/Said he makes guilty whites feel good/They'll vote for him, and not for me/Cause he's not from the 'hood."

While this AFP piece suggests that 'Barack The Magic Negro' "has triggered a nasty battle for the soul of the struggling [Republican] party," Posts Washington and Huffington both reach the same sad conclusion- Saltsman's actions may actually have helped his candidacy.

Peace on Earth, Goodwill to All Men (Except in Gaza)

Five days ago, after the cessation of the truce between the Israeli Government and Hamas, Enduring America wrote:

There will be a series of bombings and targeted assassinations as the rocket attacks continue. In effect, this is a situation of deadly stalemate.

And so it goes, as Kurt Vonnegut would say. After an increase in rockets into Southern Israel, the Israeli Defense Force swung the heavy fist this morning. More than 30 missiles have killed more than 150 people so far.



We mention our prediction not to brag but to point out the near-inevitability that "the cycle of violence", that over-used but over-appropriate phrase, was going to spiral. Groups in Gaza, either directly responsible to Hamas or independent of the Gazan Government, were going to increase the firing of rockets and missiles. That scatter-gun attack, sooner or later, was going to kill an Israeli, and when it did, both the pretext and the political necessity would be established for a large-scale response from Tel Aviv. (Doubly so, when the current Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, is locked in a tense struggle with Benyamin Netanyahu to become Prime Minister.)

And so earlier this week "Israel's cabinet approved a possible operation that could last several days". There were the near-obligatory visits by Israeli officials, including Livni, and Hamas leaders to Egypt playing the near-obligatory role of mediator for a renewed ceasefire. It was clear, however, from the statements of Livni and Netanyahu that the Israeli hammer would have to fall, at least for a deadly, symbolic period.

That has now begun. Israel will count on a window of support from many in the "gatekeeping" media in the United States and Europe; Hamas, or at least the people of Gaza, will get the sympathy of media in the Middle East and the Islamic world. Precious little will be done to ratchet down the violence as it plays out for a necessary period for both Hamas to maintain its authority in Gaza (which it will) and for key Israeli politicans --- with Livni and Netanyahu scrambling to show which one of them is tougher --- and the Israeli military to show that they are not "weak". (Doubly so, after the Lebanon debacle of 2006)

All this will be propped up by the human cost --- in damage and a handful of deaths on the Israeli side of the border, in damage and dozens if not hundreds of death on the Gazan side. The causes of this latest conflict will be set aside because, with eye-catching images of destruction, who needs to seriously consider the strategy of political isolation and economic blockade that pretty much ensured this would happen?

There is a wrinkle in this normal pattern of events, which could occur over days, possibly over weeks. Normally the US Government would have to --- reluctantly, in the case of the Bush Administration --- make some noise about trying to restore stability while allowing Israel a "decent" period of time to assert military strength.

This time, however, Washington is in transition to President Obama. He has offered the platitude that "seeing if we can build on some of the progress, at least in conversation, that's been made around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be a priority". If this fighting carries on until Inauguration Day, however, the 44th President won't be dealing with platitudes but with a foreign-policy choice foisted upon him. Does he --- in the name of "American leadership" --- put Israel-Palestine at the top of his problem-solving agenda or does he take a step aside, allowing others to make the running both as warriors and as peacemakers?

Happy Holidays, everybody....

Negotiations with Syria: The Battle Begins

Unnoticed by many, a complicated dance over talks with Syria --- on a settlement with Israel, on its position vis-a-vis Lebanon, and on its relations with Iran and Hezbollah --- is beginning. For a mix of reasons, some good (finally defusing some of the tension between Tel Aviv and Damascus), some not so good (the mistaken belief that this will mean the isolation of Tehran in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf), serious talks for the first time in almost a decade appear imminent.

Still, Washington firebrands who dreamed of Syrian regime change during the Dubya Years aren't going down without a fight.

The excellent Joshua Landis has this analysis:

Syria is the Only Game in Town

Syria is the only game in town for those wishing to advance peace between Arabs and Israel. This has the Jewish right apoplectic. Danielle Pletka, who worked under John Bolton in the State Department, tries sarcasm and insults in her "The Syrian Strategy" to embarrass those who would advance this strategy.

Barry Rubin, publisher of MERIA journal and author of The Truth About Syria gathered several Washington Institute types such as Patrick Clawson and David Schenker and other likeminded policy types to tell Americans that they are foolish to negotiate with Syria and Iran. Equally foolish is to try to make peace between Arabs and Jews or to withdraw from Iraq anytime soon. Rubin knowingly asserts that Obama’s “belief, that [America] can make friends with Iran and Syria, soothe grievances that have caused Islamism and terrorism, and solve the Arab-Israeli conflict …. is a miscalculation about the Middle East.”

Americans perennially make the mistake of viewing the Middle East “in Western terms,” Rubin informs us, which leads “to frustration and even disaster.” Why? Because “You have to inspire fear in your enemies.” “Unfortunately, the change they want means wiping other states off the map.”

This “good versus evil” world view is repeated by the other participants of this round table, who seem to be nodding at each other in their desire to sound the toxin of existential extinction should the new administration lift its foot off the throat of its Arab and Persian enemies. The US’s only choice is to keep its many enemies in the region in a state of abject fear.

David Schenker explains that Bush viewed Bashar al-Assad as “basically as irredeemable.” Schenker basically agrees. He worries that ”Obama appears to believe that Syria can play a more productive role in the region.” To Schenker’s chagrin, even “Dennis Ross, himself who is being mentioned as the possible Middle East coordinator has written that Assad should be tested.” Dennis Ross is The Washington Institute’s counselor and Ziegler distinguished fellow. David Schenker is a senior fellow and director of the Program on Arab Politics at The Washington Institute.

Schenker concedes that if Syria were to flip, and cut its relations with Iran and “jettison Hizballah and Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups and move into the Western camp,” it would be a good thing. Like, Barry Rubin, Schenker clearly does not expect Syria to do any such thing. To guard against the Golan being given away for what he seems to believe will be nothing, Schenker will have to police the Obama administration and encourage it to make many up front demands for change.

He and his colleagues will work assiduously to hang all kinds of Christmas balls and bobbles on the engagement tree, such that it is hard to imagine any progress or deal being struck. In order to protect her flank from such criticism, Israel’s foreign minister Livni reassured Israelis that she would be tough and not accept a “humus” peace. She said,

“What is important to us is not a peace of opening embassies and eating Humus in Damascus, but the halting of arms smuggling through Syria to Hezbollah, their strong ties to Iran and their endless support of terrorist organizations such as Hamas,” said the foreign minister.

Olmert has defended his drive to continue negotiations:

Referring to the ongoing indirect talks, Olmert said “the talks with Syria were thorough and important. Removing Syria from the radical axis is one of Israel’s top priorities.”"Tough sacrifices will be required,” Olmert said, “but the prevention of lost lives is worth it. Syria is not interested in belonging to the axis of evil and wants to forge ties with the U.S.”

For his part, Bashar al-Assad also has demands and wants to tamp down expectations that he flip. He wants Israelis to agree on the exact 1967 Golan borders so that the two sides will not get stuck in Geneva as they did in 2000 with very different expectations about borders. Assad also told European diplomats that he isn’t responsible for restraining Hezbollah, and won’t be “Israel’s bodyguard.”

Syrian President Bashar Assad has told a number of European foreign ministers and senior diplomats this month that he would not lift a finger to restrain Hezbollah’s arming in Lebanon. “I am not Israel’s bodyguard,” he reportedly said…. On the one hand, the officials said their impression was that the Syrian president was serious about negotiations, but that Assad’s positions remained uncompromising.

The source said Assad told the Europeans that Syria was willing to take significant steps in talks with Israel only after an Israeli declaration that it would withdraw from the entire Golan Heights.

Assad refuses to make concessions before he gets guarantees about withdrawal. Israel will also refuse to make concessions until it has guarantees.

Alaska Update: Sarah Palin, the Wasilla Bible Church, Gay Rights, and a Fire

This just in from our Alaska Bureau, reporting from Wasilla:

The investigation into the fire that nearly destroyed the Wasilla Bible Church, the religious home of former Vice-Presidential candidate and evangelical-right favorite Sarah Palin, widened this week when the Central Mat-Su Fire Department and the Alaska State Fire Marshals Office requested assistance from the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. The onsite investigation revealed that an accelerant had been used in multiple locations to spread the fire. No injuries were reported, though the structure sustained more than $1 million of damage.



In September the church held a Focus on the Family's ‘Love Won Out’ conference, the aim of which is to "to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality". Because of this, some on the right are labelling the fire a "hate crime" and an "arson and attempted murder...perpetrated by advocates of homosexual marriage". These allegations were repeated by Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren in an interview with Palin, who then apologized to the congregation if her candidacy brought "undeserved negative attention’ to the church".

The charges come at an especially delicate moment for President-elect Obama, who faces criticism from gay rights advocates because he picked Rick Warren to give the inauguration invocation. Warren is the superchurch pastor who  put forward California's Proposition 8, which restricted the definition of marriage to a union between a man and a woman.

It remains to be seen whether or not Wasilla will become a hotbed of political activism or the Ground Zero of a yet unidentified gay anarchist collective, but we will keep you posted.