|
|
|
|
|
|
|
President Bush has had a hands-off approach to I$rael and the Arabs for a long time. MIM now points out how this may cause I$rael to miscalculate.
By criticizing Bush and even hiding behind him, I$rael may believe that it has the game nailed down. As Barak said, Bush won't be president soon anymore.
When we look at the Democratic leaders, they are also pro-I$rael up and down the line. So in the name game, we can actually piece together what appears to be an almost structural argument on I$rael's position in the world, because there are no pro-Arab leaders among u.$. politicians.
Leaving the question at that would be incorrect and it is a reason that MIM has excoriated the flabby Arab bourgeoisie talking about a "Zionist lobby" as all-powerful. This is backward thinking. There is a Zionist lobby, but Arabs can also spend money lobbying. More importantly, the Palestinians have nothing to lose but their chains, so they can afford to adopt a non-bourgeois method of struggle.
One real danger to I$rael is the collapse of the official 9/11 story. Here again there can be a mistake in a who-oriented approach. Bush will not be able to stop the collapse of the 9/11 story. If Hillary Clinton is a senator or president, she plus Bush will not be able to stop it. A Senate committee led by Senator Lugar will not be able to stop it. All it takes is a lawsuit by any of a number of people with an interest in the question. There is not really a who-oriented defense I$rael can employ if the official 9/11 story is false.
I$rael put its eggs in the neo-conservative basket, by which we do not mean I$rael does not have Democratic leaders in their pocket. Rather I$rael is not the only tail in the world.
If the 9/11 story collapses and suburban soccer-mom is foaming at the mouth at her Republican club meeting or VFW folks become angry, I$rael will lose out. 9/11 is more important to Amerikans than I$rael is.
Now in the event of such a collapse, if I$rael has not already made peace with its neighbors--well the logic of the situation suggests itself. So this is what we mean by having its eggs in the neo- conservative basket. The story of the world since 9/11 is neo- conservative and I$rael needs to make peace now, just in case.
The Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia put it this way for public consumption regarding Iraq: "it is not the concept of -- or the conception of what needs to be done in Iraq, it is just doing it. It's going ahead and doing it. If you're accused of imperialism -- and God forgive me for saying that -- be a (inaudible) imperialist."(1) So in other words, the Saudis say the united $tates is leaving a mess and have not even succeeded as imperialists. If the name-brand imperialists, the United $tates cannot fix things its way in the Mideast, then why does I$rael still act like it can is the question.
In Palestine, the Saudis also pointed out that there cannot be peace without Hamas, so Bush's approach is a joke. This is important, because Hamas is not from the Saudis' version of religion. The Saudis are taking a totally realistic position on this question, not one of narrow-minded favoritism. MIM would say that Bush cannot touch Hamas,(2) because of the U.$. labor aristocracy, so we need to go around Bush. MIM is doing that. It is I$rael that must realize why Hamas has to be included while I$rael's geopolitical position is still relatively good. With every passing year, U.$. power relative to the rest of the world will only decline.
The I$raeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has asked the Arab states to give him something in return for concessions to the Palestinians. He speaks as if what Saudi Arabia is doing for Amerika is not worth a million times more than I$rael's release of 90 prisoners. So from his public comments we would have to say that Livni is continuing to promote an air of unreality in the Mideast peace process.
If I$rael were serious about the Mideast peace process, it would realize what Saudi Arabia is already doing for the united $tates. I$rael would already be stopping settlements and preparing public opinion for that.
Of course MIM is aware how virtually impossible it is to reason with settlers. It is a very unfavorable political economy. That's why it looks like I$rael is headed for long-term violent collapse with a one-state solution under the joint dictatorship of the proletariat of the oppressed nations. If the bourgeoisie and Arab princes are not able to work out a gradual two-state solution, collapse of I$rael's geopolitical position, revolution and the one-state solution are in the offing.
Notes:
1. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/27/africa/27charlie.php?page=3
2. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/27/africa/27charlie.php?page=7