Could we maybe just get one prominent stateside pundit who writes with the sort of clarity and conviction that is apparently commonplace at Haaretz?
Since the end of the 1960s, the alliance between Israel and the United States has been an open one. Israel learned to reject any solution to the conflict with the Palestinians with the aid of the “Soviet interest” demon and turned itself into a stick. Its withdrawal from the territories was the Americans’ carrot to the Arabs. The peace with Egypt was made possible only when that country abandoned its alliance with the Soviet Union. But that world has disappeared.
In no time, our leaders got addicted to a new kind of landlordship – a world with a single power where Israel enjoyed the status of a regional power under the aegis of the patron. In this way, it received treasures – 1 million immigrants, permission to settle them in the territories, expansion of the settlements to catastrophic proportions, advanced weapons, and a green light for three wars against a civilian population.
That chapter has ended and political Israel does not understand the new world. From time to time, we hear hints that U.S. President Barack Obama is “naive.” But Obama was elected after the United States’ failure to be the sole superpower became obvious to all. That’s where the discussion about the Iranian nuclear program must take place.
I’ll admit I’m not very well studied on foreign policy / national security type stuff and when the posturing and shouting starts it’s harder for me to cut through the BS than it is when we’re talking domestic policy or etc. I will certainly be keeping these editorials in mind the next time some puffed-up American pundit does a song and dance and starts “speaking for the Jews” to try and convince me to feel a particular way on Israel policy.