Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

At the White House, Netanyahu makes his case

Binyamin Netanyahu doesn’t have any illusions about Barack Obama’s regard for him, despite their friendly meeting at the White House on Tuesday. But Netanyahu does apparently believe that if he presents this most cerebral of U.S. presidents with a well-reasoned position, he’ll be listened to. Hence his behavior -- and the relative warming of U.S.-Israeli relations -- in recent weeks.

Take Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip. For some time, according to people close to him, Netanyahu regarded the policy as counterproductive. Following the confrontation with a Turkish-led flotilla that left nine dead, the blockade became indefensible. Netanyahu couldn’t make a rational argument to the White House that Israel needed to deprive the 1.5 million Palestinians of Gaza of cilantro, ketchup and other basic goods. He could easily explain why it must continue to prevent the smuggling of Iranian missiles and other arms to Hamas.

So Netanyahu dropped the ban on food and consumer goods, while insisting that Israel must intercept ships that might be carrying weapons. The result was accord on what could have been another point of contention between Washington and Jerusalem. Obama “welcomed the prime minister’s efforts to implement Israel’s new policy in Gaza,” said a White House statement on Tuesday’s meeting.

The Middle East peace process is a tougher problem for Netanyahu and Obama. The White House believes Mahmoud Abbas is willing and able to agree to terms with Israel on Palestinian statehood. Netanyahu, like most Israelis, thinks otherwise. Obama believes an Israeli settlement freeze is crucial to advancing negotiations; Netanyahu, like every Israeli prime minister before him, rejects the link.

But here, too, Netanyahu has formulated a pragmatic and non-ideological position -- one that he discussed with Obama at length on Tuesday.

The argument, which Netanyahu has laid out publicly in several speeches in the last year, goes like this: Times have changed in the Middle East since 1993, when Israel and the Palestinians concluded the Oslo accords calling for a gradual handover of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to Palestinian government. Then, the main threat to Israelis in the territories was Palestinian rock-throwers. Now, thanks to the growing power of Iran, Israel is surrounded by tens of thousands of short- and medium-range missiles. There are thousands in southern Lebanon, from which Israel withdrew in 2000 and which was subsequently occupied by Hezbollah. And there are hundreds, maybe thousands more in Gaza, from which Israel withdrew in 2005, and which was later taken over by Hamas.

Israel, Netanyahu told Obama, has to be able to ensure that the West Bank won’t also become an Iranian missile base following a peace settlement. The logic of his argument is hard to refute, from any reasonable standpoint. Who would contend that there is no danger that missiles would be smuggled to the new Palestinian state from the east, from Syria, Lebanon or Jordan? Is it reasonable to suppose that a UN peacekeeping force would suffice to protect the border, given the failure of such a force to stop smuggling to Lebanon?

That’s not to say that Netanyahu has come up with a trump card to block the peace process. He has said himself that there are ways to solve the security problem, including a phase-in of Palestinian control over the eastern border of the state. But the Israeli leader is demonstrating that he has figured out a way to talk to a president who hasn’t displayed much sentimentality when it comes to Israel. Forget about sentiment; make a good argument.

By Jackson Diehl  | July 7, 2010; 1:02 PM ET
Categories:  Diehl  | Tags:  Jackson Diehl  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama's terrorist lawyer wants illegals to control Arizona?
Next: David Obey's bankrupt idea to bail out teachers


Israel is a strategic liability for America. Our government and the MSM are overly concerned about what's best for Israel instead of what's best for America.

Posted by: David77 | July 7, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Diehl's commentary is a faithful recitation of the Israeli government's position on the relevant issues. I suppose it is useful to have this, though I do wonder if the Post could not save some money by using Israel's perfectly competent embassy as a resource instead of a highly paid columnist.

I'm sorry that this commentary did not address some relevant questions. These include whether "sources close to Netanyahu" had any guesses as to why it took a violent episode on a Turkish ship to persuade him to lift the cilantro blockade that Netanyahu has always regarded as counterproductive. Also, whether the Israeli government thought there might be any other factor contributing to Palestinian hostility besides the growing power of Iran. And, whether the Israeli government regards the moratorium on settlements on the West Bank as something to be negotiated with the Palestinians, or only with the settler lobby's representatives in the Knesset.

I have to say Dana Milbank's take on President Obama's meeting with the Israeli prime minister had a louder ring of truth to it than Mr. Diehl's. I don't care about the Palestinians, and recognize there is no American interest at stake in who governs what parts of the West Bank of the Jordan River. I do think it's a bad thing when the President of the United States looks as if he can be pushed around, especially when he is in the right. It's bad for our international relations; it's bad in our domestic politics. This is how Obama looked after the meeting with Netanyahu.

Posted by: jbritt3 | July 7, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

I am glad to see that the strongest argument that Nineteen could come up with is to swear and reveal his bigotry.
To jbritt3: did it occur to you, or to Mr Milbank, that Mr Netanyahu's arguments may be valid? and that he actually succeeded convincing Mr Obama?
Mr Obama made a fool of himself when he blamed Israel and now he just became wiser, which makes him stronger. Not weaker.

Posted by: Josh26 | July 7, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Obama allowed an ally to save face at the White House. Milbank's outrage is ridiculous. Nothing of substance was changed.

And Diehl finds Netanyahoo to be a model of logic and persuasion. After all, he dropped a silly and counterproductive embargo policy, and it only took a few years and a wave of bad press for him to get it! Next, he told Obama that he doesn't want a neighbor aiming missiles at his country. Wow, that sure refuted the position that it's good to have neighbors aiming missiles at you! What were all the advocates of having missiles aimed at you thinking?

Posted by: turningfool | July 7, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Fact: Israel is the reincarnation of Nazi Germany.
Their goal, shrewdly managed. . Eliminate and replace "subhumans", i.e. Palestinians.

Humanity's Voice in the Wilderness? Jimmy Carter.

Posted by: lufrank1 | July 7, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

This is such a sick relationship! Sort of like having a kid that turns into Charles Manson! As a good person and parent; we need to let this depraved delinqent go to jail, prevent it from doing itself or others more damge, and recognize there is no possibility of ever curing this pyschopathic nation!

Posted by: CHAOTICIAN101 | July 7, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Netanyahu paints bullseyes on top of every Israeli's head.

They are phukcing doomed—

Posted by: lichtme | July 7, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Fact: Israel is the reincarnation of Nazi Germany.
Their goal, shrewdly managed. . Eliminate and replace "subhumans", i.e. Palestinians.

Humanity's Voice in the Wilderness? Jimmy Carter.

Posted by: lufrank1 | July 7, 2010 2:05 PM
Fact: lufrank1 is the reincarnation of John Wayne Gacy.

This statement is as true as anything lufrank1 posted.

Posted by: PhilThijou | July 7, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

"Fact: Israel is the reincarnation of Nazi Germany."

Fact: you are the reincarnationof Nazi Germany.

Posted by: princeps2 | July 7, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Nineteen: is that your IQ?

Posted by: PhilThijou | July 7, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

LOL Looks like the party is over for Iran !!!

All you Hamas lovers can rant and rave, but Iran and the Ayatollah will be bombed back to the stone age.

Posted by: princeps2 | July 7, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Nineteen: is that your IQ?

Posted by: PhilThijou


His IQ is probably nineteen. Whether is laced in vulgarities or the reincarnation of David Duke these types troll here whenever there's an article/post about Israel.

Posted by: bbface21 | July 7, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

You can tell an apologist like Diehl from a sincere analyst when they don't bother to flesh out common sense questions.
Regarding the settlements: every president since LBJ for over 40 years now has said the settlements are a problem. They are immoral and just plain WRONG!!! I don't care whether Netanyahu and Diehl conveniently claim there is no link with the peace process. So what! That therefore excuses theft of others land?! The US has done SO MUCH for Israel, and all Netanyahu and Diehl can do is make excuses for humiliating us in front of the world.
What about Palestine's security? If some other country is blatantly stealing their land, shouldn't the US fight for what is right? We certainly should not be funding what is wrong. If Israel has the $$ to steal land and build illegal settlements, then they certainly do NOT need our good money. I am tired of the pathetic excuses.

Posted by: arpy58 | July 7, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

"The White House believes Mahmoud Abbas is willing and able to agree to terms with Israel on Palestinian statehood. Netanyahu, like most Israelis, thinks otherwise."

The last time I looked, Mahmoud Abbas was not the elected leader of the Palestinian Territories. That's a new form of democracy, for sure - smiles all around at how free and fair the election was, turning to puzzled looks as the realization sinks in that "their guy" didn't get elected. Then the embracing of Abbas as if he had actually won, and a policy of talking only to or through him rather than the elected government.

Hamas is itself an Israeli creation, inspired and nurtured as a counterweight to the PLO. Now that the PLO is gone, it's like, Hamas; I just don't know you any more.

"Israel, Netanyahu told Obama, has to be able to ensure that the West Bank won’t also become an Iranian missile base following a peace settlement.The logic of his argument is hard to refute, from any reasonable standpoint."

No, it's not. His logic suggests that mass deportations of the Arabs from the West Bank, followed by resettlement of the entire West Bank by Jews would be the only real guarantee of peace. Does that make sense to you? It certainly makes sense to Netanyahu, as it's precisely what he's been arguing for since about 1989. If that occurred, would it not be reasonable to assume attacks would take place directly from Syria, Lebanon and Jordan? And if so, what would be the Israeli policy then? Jewish colonization of those states?

Stopping the resettlement of the West Bank by Jews who are stealing the land on which the settlements are built and then establishing large "security zones" that double the settlements' physical size is simultaneously a key to stopping the rocket attacks, and abandonment of a goal the Israelis will never relinquish. If 1967 didn't teach the world that Israel doesn't give back land it has seized, I don't know what better argument could be made.

Posted by: marknesop | July 7, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

To the people spewing anti-Israeli hate:

Which word in "never again" don't you understand?

Posted by: roblimo | July 7, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

AIPAC slapped the Democratic majority around in Congress, so the word was passed to Obama to lay off Israel. Netanyahu has little to do with this.

Posted by: Puller58 | July 7, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Zionism needs anti-Semitism to survive otherwise there is no need for the "Jewish" state. That being so, would it not make sense for Zionists to write blatantly crude comments to make it seem there are old-fashioned anti-Semites around? The comments can easily be removed and traced; so why does the WP allow them? Is it to pretend there are still dangerous anti-Semitism everywhere?

Posted by: danigo | July 7, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Israel pulled out of the Sinai, Lebanon and Gaza for the sake of Peace. Since everyone wants Israel to do more, can anyone tell me a single thing the Palesitnians have done or that the world community even demands that THEY do for peace?

Posted by: aadlersberg | July 7, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Netanyahu wants only one state and believes that eventually Israel can exterminate the Palestinians through exile or internal subjugation as manual labor for Israelis. If Israel truly wanted peace with the Palestinians, it would be building schools for the children, building inter-structure such as roads necessary for economic growth. Instead, it wants a compliance Palestinian consumer population, consuming goods from the illegal settlements, to support illegal settlers supported by American tax-deductible donations or taxpayer’s grants that allows Israel to divert Israelis taxes to expand the West Bank settlements. Why do the Palestinians hate the Israelis? Go there, live among them for a week and you will too.

Posted by: rs1952 | July 7, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

I believe the security concerns Israel has regarding the West Bank are completely valid. However, they are not an argument for the settlements, which actually exacerbate Israel's security problem and of course oppress the Palestinians. I fail to understand why no one is pushing for the withdrawal of ALL the settlers, but leaving the Israel military in place until a final agreement has been reached. The military could be redeployed to prevent the importation of rockets and other threats to Israel proper, while removing the endless checkpoints and other steps required to protect settlers. Not an ideal solution, but it improve life for the Palestinians, clearly signal Israeli intent to leave the West Bank, while preventing the rise of threats to Israel from its east. Somehow this approach - civilians go, redeployed military stays until a formal peace agreement - is never mentioned by those who claim to be concerned about Israeli security. Instead, they try to justify what to any objective observer looks not like a buffer, but a land grab.

Posted by: czapniks | July 7, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe this fairy tale passes for informed comment. This is pure Israeli propaganda. If the reasons Diehl is recanting are the real reasons for concern over Israel's security then there can never be a two-state solution. Israel's security is not worth the moral insult of its land grab and apartheid attitudes. It's wrong Diehl, just wrong, and you should be deeply ashamed of yourself for playing the role of patsy. Of couse you're just another hired hand, not really a free thinker. Shame. Shame. Shame.

Posted by: Speranza | July 7, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

""This country [Israel] now has a blind captain in the cockpit, flying his blindfolded passengers with exemplary precision toward the destination he envisioned. If there had still been any object of his scaremongering that had not yet been attained before this week, along came the outrageous seizure of the flotilla, and that goal too was in the bag.

If anyone was still entertaining a glimmer of hope that our pilot wasn't totally blind, that he had some special sight-enhancing gadget, along came his declaration that the blockade of Gaza would continue. Let the world and wisdom and Gaza all go to hell, and incidentally Israel too - and dash that glimmer of hope as well. After the saws and knives seized on the Marmara have been publicly exhibited, we will be able to convince ourselves once and for all that there is indeed a danger lurking in every alley, an Al-Qaida operative on every ship, weapons on every deck - and even that the Marmara was an existential threat, no less, just as our leader had foreseen.""

By Gideon Levy,

Posted by: 1humanity | July 7, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

What Diehl fails to mention is:
It is a historical fact now that no Israeli government has ever abided by any of the promises they made since 1948 including the many UN resolutions and the Oslo Agreement and kept expanding its illegal settlements in the occupied land.
However, through their propaganda machine here in the U.S., they have been coming up with phony excuses:
First, there was no one to represent Palestinians, then, PLO was a terrorist organization, then, Arafat was not a "partner for peace," then, Abbas was not strong enough, then, Palestinian authority was not representing all of the Palestinians, then, democratically elected Hamas was a terrorist group! then, they wanted to eliminate Hamas and the Palestinians in Gaza and only want to talk to Abbas! Now, they want us to eliminate yet another one of their adversaries Iran! Uhm, are we seeing a pattern here!?
Let UN and neutral world parties (with some dignity and justice) objectively take some actions to stop this 21st century disgrace to humanity.

Posted by: 1humanity | July 7, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

giving the present situation that israel finds it self in it can not defend its self from attack if Ive read this article right. so by giving palestinians a state it will be no more difficult. if ive read this article right some one or everyone wants to attack israel. they share boarders now with countries they claim are out to get them. so they need not fear one more sovern state or is that the problem. they dont want the palestinians to have a sovern state.

Posted by: | July 7, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Netanyahu knew he didn't have to make any argument at all - he knew that if said jump, Obama will acquiesce (with a grin.

Posted by: Kingofkings1 | July 7, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Diehl's AIPAC solution is simple: Israel's American colonists should do its bidding by bombing Iran and then sending their sons and daughters there to shed blood and die for another front in the endless Christian Oil Crusades the US is now so hopelessly addicted to.

Sarah Palin agrees.

Posted by: areyousaying | July 7, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Here is how the apartheid regime of Israel and its agents in the US define "democracy":

Rule #1: In the Middle East, it is always the Palestinians that attack first, and it's always Israel who defends itself. This is called "retaliation".

Rule #2: The Palestinians are not allowed to kill Israelis. This is called "terrorism".

Rule #3: Israel has the right to kill Palestinian civilians; this is called "self-defense", or "collateral damage".

Rule #4: When Israel kills too many Palestinian civilians, the Western world calls for restraint. This is called the "reaction of the international community".

Rule #5: Palestinians do not have the right to capture Israeli military, not even 1 or 2.

Rule #6 : Israel has the right to capture as many Palestinians as they want (around 10,000 to date being held without trial). There is no limit; there is no need for proof of guilt or trial. All that is needed is the magic word: "terrorism".

Rule #7: When you say "Hamas", always be sure to add "supported by Hezbollah, Syria and Iran".

Rule #8: When you say " Israel", never say "supported by the USA, the UK, European countries and even some Arab regimes", for people (God forbid) might believe this is not an equal conflict.

Rule #9: When it comes to Israel, don't mention the words "occupied", " territories", "UN resolutions", "Geneva conventions". This could distress the audience of Fox, CNN, WP, etc.

Rule #10: Israelis speak better English than Arabs. This is why we let them speak out as much as possible, so that they can explain rules 1 through 9. This is called "neutral journalism". (We see it all the time in WP!)

Rule #11: If you don't agree with these rules or if you favor the Palestinian side over the Israeli side, you must be a very dangerous anti-Semite. You may even have to make a public apology if you express your honest opinion.

Go figure!

Posted by: 1humanity | July 7, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

It's all about another pre-emptive war in Iran.

Posted by: areyousaying | July 7, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Natanyahu openly lied about the raid and he knew the people were killed. The lies continued as Natanyahu said one man shot himself 6 times even continuing to shoot himself when he was already dead. Yes many believed that lie but he UN showed pictures that prove Natanyahu was lying. We show how Israel is straving Palestine people to death by refusing to give them their food and medical supplies. About to be charged with War Crimes, Natanyahu got one soldier to fall on the sword for the crimes. Even as the fix is on the soldiers made a video shown on youtube as soldiers patrol the Palestine streets looking to kill anyone who opens their door, then breaking out in a rock dance. Hate and Evil runs deep in Israel and God is watching.

Posted by: qqbDEyZW | July 7, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

"Israel pulled out of the Sinai, Lebanon and Gaza for the sake of Peace."

You conveniently left out that Israel first invaded and seized all those lands before "pulling out for peace". In fact, that seems to be Israeli doctrine - claim a threat from a given region, hammer the cr*p out of it for days or weeks on end using the latest and most efficient military technology from the U.S. while a goggle-eyed western world looks on without quite being able to bring itself to shout "STOP!!!". Kill a hundred or so of the place's citizens for every dead Israeli. In the case of the invasion of Lebanon, pump as much water as you can out of the river before you withdraw, and even cart away the topsoil in trucks as you retreat. Claim that you "pulled out for peace", then sit back and wait to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize.

Major heavyweights in Israeli policy-making have said that Greater Israel's boundaries should be the Jordan and the Litani. Have a look on the map, and see who'd have to give up land to make that a reality.

Once upon a time, not so very long ago, Netanyahu's grinning triumph would have passed without a word of demur. Ordinary people are getting fed up with Israel's rapacious land-grabbing, and support for Israel is no longer automatic. It's still government policy, but it won't be if enough people indicate their unwillingness to go on financing Israel the Predator. That doesn't mean Israel as a state should cease to exist. But its policy of routinely invading its neighbours in order to guarantee its own security must. Building in the West Bank must stop, and the settlements already built must be returned to the Palestinians.

Israel has already stated categorically, as long ago as 1967, that it will never return land it has taken. So the fighting will grind on for lifetimes.

Posted by: marknesop | July 7, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

The "Cilantro Blockade" is the crux of the problem. The Israeli right-wing's efforts have nothing to do with security and everything to do with humiliating, debilitating and eventually annililating the Palestinian people. Just like they bulldozed farms and homes before it.

Posted by: hoos3014 | July 7, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Obama's behavior was disgraceful and despicable. When you are willing to compromise your principles for transient benefits, you have stooped to the level of animals.

Posted by: Kingofkings1 | July 7, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

1humanity said:..."no Israeli government has ever abided by any of the promises they made since 1948...".

Uh, you made a mistake there--need to substitute "Palestinian" for Israeli.

Posted by: capsfan77 | July 7, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse

It bothers me that conventional wisdom now universally condemns the settlements. I think they should make more of them. First, the UN gave the Palestinians a chance; it's called Jordan. Then, the Israeli's gave them lots of chances. F them.

US: $500 billion annual defense budget = quagmire in Iraq + Afghanistan

Israel: $55 billion annual defense budget (3 from US) = victories in the arab-israeli war, 2 intifadas, 2 lebanon wars, 6 day war. Don't put too much faith in U$S.

Posted by: batigol85 | July 7, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Diehl should abandon his AIPAC perch for once and go and stay in Gaza for a week. Live like a local. Unless his heart is made of stone and his head wood actually staying in the world's biggest open-air prison for a time should change his perspective so he has something more useful to say for once than simply parroting the Likud party line.

After all, he's supposed to be a journalist and what self-respecting journalist wouldn't want to get the facts firsthand?

Posted by: politbureau | July 7, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse


The missing factors in these discussiona are Hamas and Abbas. In 2006, during the Palestinian Civil War, Abbas turned to Israel to fight off Hamas. Where do Hamas and Fatah stand now?

Israel unitlaterally left Gaza, asking for nothing in return. The Palestinians demanded that all homes, schools, stores be disbanded and they were. If Palestinians wanted to settle there, surely they would not have asked for the demolition. IN fact, we now know what they wanted. They wanted to use Gaza to fire missiles into Sderot, kill and maime, etc. And Netanyahu should trust them because....

In the meantime, the community which was destroyed in Gaza, thousands who knew no other life, continue to suffer, have no place to live. And Netanyahu should trust them because?

Abbas, whom Israel helped win against Hamas, just held a celebration for the Munich Olympic Athlete murderers. Sure, trust Abbas.

And, never forget, the Temple MOUNT. It ain't goin' anywhere soon. And the Cave of the Patriarchs. Jews have prayed three times a day facing the Temple Mount for two thousand years. Imperialist Muslims actually built a mosque on top of it. Hey, how about building a synagogue on top of the Vatican? We get to pray there. Period. Here there is no deal. Yerushalayim is the Capital of Israel. And Netanyahu should trust them because...?

Posted by: farnaz_mansouri2 | July 7, 2010 8:46 PM | Report abuse

There is a way to get this problem solved. The US makes a deal with the Palestinians and the Arab world, for US troops, in full force as we operate in Iraq or Afghanistan, to secure the Palestinian territories to 1967 borders and provide full security there as we build up that country. Lets give the Palestinian the same opportunity as Iraq and Afganistan and lets get the problem solved. Most military aid to Israel is suspended and applied to this new project. It is time to clean this mess up with a bold move! An American initiative!!

Posted by: likovid | July 7, 2010 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Ok. So Netanyahu makes a credible argument that Israel needs to occupy the West Bank to keep the Palestinians from firing rockets into Israel. This justifies the Israeli ARMY occupying the West Bank. But there's still no excuse for the Israeli CIVILIAN settlements which are nothing but a land grab.

Posted by: Orion838 | July 7, 2010 9:10 PM | Report abuse

The neo-con editors, columnists and reporters are always consistent in the following:

1) support for Israeli regardless of the country's actions in the middle east

2) opposition to a viable, independent, Palestinian nation

3) seeking ever increasing military spending to impose Pax America over most of the world

4) seeming to support adding a third, possibly fourth war for this country, against Iran, North Korea

5) having an antiquated cold war mentality toward Russia and China, probably because they are mired in the platitudes of the past and need to invent adversaries to try to justify huge, logically unnecessary, military spending

6) try to cloak aggressive military actions in the name of spreading "democracy," and "freedom," while supporting the policies of the Bush II - Cheney administration in restricting freedoms at home

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | July 7, 2010 9:21 PM | Report abuse

Diehl is either a total naif or a total idiot.

Whether it is 1993 or 2010, Netanyahu always comes up with some excuse for why Israel shouldn't make a peace agreement with the Palestinians.

The real reason, both then and now, is to stall the U.S. while the Likud government continues to build more and more settlements in the West Bank. That is always the bottom line.

Posted by: maggots | July 7, 2010 9:50 PM | Report abuse

I must give the Israeli Russian Khazars like netanyahu and the Israeli Khazars of Washington a credit: They are the best liars in the world! No doubt, their lies will lead to their demise!

Posted by: editor4tonio | July 7, 2010 10:15 PM | Report abuse

I must give the Israeli Russian Khazars like netanyahu and the Israeli Khazars of Washington a credit: They are the best liars in the world! No doubt, their lies will lead to their demise!

Posted by: editor4tonio | July 7, 2010 10:18 PM | Report abuse

The Israelis are manufacturing an end to their state, and they and their lobby in the US will deserve it when it arrives. They will continue to settle and occupy land with a population greater than theirs until they cannot deny their status as a non-democratic state. They will be faced with openly engaging in ethnic cleansing, rather than this muffled form presently occurring. It seems that even pragmatic arguments cannot dissuade them and their lobby, much less intangible ideas, such as human rights and comity.

Meanwhile, Israel will have alienated its only friend in the world by dragging us by the nose through the mud at any pitiful attempt to moderate Israeli misconduct, while bankrupting us with wars of at best marginal benefit to US security. The US could never do enough for Israel in the minds of Jews here... sick of their control of 98% of the population. I can relate to Palestinians feeling like they don't have any control over the situation.

Posted by: hvonm | July 7, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Thinking out loud here ....

Is there REALLY a link between the thousands of Arab rockets aimed at Israel and statehood for the Palestinians?

Obviously, occupation can't won't and hasn't prevented the rocketeers from gathering the tools of their trade. So let it go. Let them have their state. And the first time a rocket lands in Israel, the Israelis invade the sovereign state of Palestinistan. THAT's how international affairs are usually conducted.

PS to editor4tonio - the rest of us know that the "Khazar" business is just a legend. Try reading factual sources - not propaganda.

Posted by: Pennywhistler | July 10, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Having recently spent nine weeks touring Israel and the Palestinian territories to see what is happening there for ourselves, my wife and I are truly heartened by the volume and strength of the rejection of Israeli policy that we read in your notes today. Thank you. But we must do even more. We must exert even more pressure, particularly on our Congressmen and women who have been bought and paid for by AIPAC. They are the ones that forge US policy such that it blindly favors Israel. We must stop the over $3 billion annual gift to Israel of our tax dollars which it uses to feed its war machine.

Believe me please - we saw this with our own eyes in Jan-Mar 2010. Israel does not want peace. Israel is focused on a land grab and ethnic cleansing. Palestinians today are treated like Jews were in Nazi Germany before war broke out. They are considered as dirty and uneducated. They are harassed, segregated to ghettos and discriminated against in many ways. They are threatened and humiliated daily at checkpoints. Their property is being stolen daily (thanks to creative Israeli laws and procedures), their houses destroyed, their spirits broken.

So thank you all for raising your voices against this horrible, illegal and racist treatment of Palestinians.

Yes, Israel should exist - in security - in memory of the holocaust. But I say as well that the downtrodden, underdog Palestinians must also have a country, and the sooner the better.

Posted by: Mikeon | July 11, 2010 4:51 AM | Report abuse

Seems to me that it's time to move back to the 70's. Make Jordan and Egypt the de-facto responsible parties and unilaterally give them Gaza and the non-fenced off portion of the West bank. Then Israel will have real governments to hold responsible for missile attacks. Neither Jordan or Egypt will like this but the West could probably be convinced that Israel was acting in good faith in seeking a solution that gave them partners they could actually hold responsible for the actions of citizens in their territory. Neither Jordan nor Egypt can afford to be in the position of allowing attacks on Israel from their territories. It also calls the bluff of the Arab Nations on their "heartfelt" desire for a Palestinian state (their exceptionally long term maintenance of Palestinian refugee camps.) Both Jordan and Egypt depend on the US and I suspect intense US pressure could be put on them to force them into accepting this solution. The Jerusalem issue would require more finessing than this short proposal warrants. It's clear to me that only very radical and imaginative action on Israel's part will solve this ongoing dilemma. I suspect I'm far from alone in the West in wanting Israel to find an out to a situation that is damaging a nation, Israel, that we would prefer to admire.

Posted by: timothycat01 | July 14, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company