Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘hillary-clinton’

Going Rate for Settlement Freeze: $33.33-Million a Day

Sunday, November 14th, 2010
hillary and bibi

Hillary and Bibi look a little the worse for wear after 7 hours negotiating which candy Israel would get for agreeing to freeze extension (Mary Altaffer/AP)

America is used to buying its way to quasi-peace in Iraq and Afghanistan and appears to be doing something similar by buying Israel’s acquiescence in a 90-day, partial settlement freeze.  The going price: $33.33-million a day for the entire 90 day process [thanks readers, for correcting my math!].  Now, we know what Hillary and Bibi were doing in that New York hotel suite for seven hours earlier this week.  It wasn’t canoodling!  But she was virtually giving away the store.

As a way of computing the comparative value of Palestinian obeisance.  Clinton earlier this week held a press conference announcing a new U.S. contribution to the PA.  Pricetag?  $150-million (or about $1.5-million per day).  The first thing the Palestinians need to learn how to do is drive a harder bargain.  They bought ‘em cheap.

I say ‘partial’ because Israel will be free to continue “Judaizing” East Jerusalem by unlimited building there, which includes 1,300 units announced earlier this month.  Such “Judaizing” settlement building doesn’t include the additional quasi-legal expropriation and pilfering of existing Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem coördinated by settler land-theft groups like Elad and Irving Moskowitz’s syndicate.  The building freeze will also not apply to public buildings like hospitals, schools, police stations anywhere in the West Bank or Jerusalem.

f-35 jet fighter

Bibi's candy store gift

I remain mystified why this freeze extension was so important it was worth paying so dearly for in security guarantees and weapons sales.  After all, this is practically a year’s worth of U.S. military aid to Israel in three months!  The $3-billion amounts to the cost of 20 new U.S. F-35 fighter jets (one wonders to what mischief Israel could put them regarding a few military adventures it is angling to take on…).

Not to mention, the U.S. has also agreed to veto any Arab/Palestinian effort to bring its proposal for recognition of statehood before the Security Council (at least for the next three months).  Further, this statement from Obama’s in-house version of Dennis Ross, Dan Shapiro, indicates the U.S. will combat world-wide “de-legitimization” (a new pro-Israel hasbarist buzzword) efforts against Israel as part of this bargain:

They included increased U.S. diplomatic opposition to efforts to delegitimize Israel in international fora, continuing to block efforts to revive the Goldstone Report at the United Nations, promising to block condemnation of Israel at the United Nations for its raid on the Gaza-bound Mavi Marmara, and defeating resolutions aimed to expose Israel’s nuclear program at the IAEA, and increasing pressure on Iran and Syria to stop their nuclear and proliferation activities.

Not only do we give these guys a jet fighter armada, we destroy any moral credibility we might have on the world stage on their behalf.  Now, I’m really starting to get mad!

What can Obama have in his mind that he can achieve with this?  Certainly, he can now get Abbas to come back to the negotiating table.  So we resume a semblance of negotiating process without any substance.  The Times article says the U.S. believes in the coming three months it can get both sides to agree on what land will be retained by the PA and what land will be retained by Israel.  After that, Israel may resume building in only the areas which both sides have confirmed will remain Israeli.  Frankly, I don’t see it.  Neither side has come anywhere near such an agreement previously and not for lack of trying.  Most recently, Olmert presented such formal border proposals to Abbas who sniffed at them and replied: “Not good enough.”  What’s changed?  Has Israel’s offer sweetened (puh-leeze)?  Has Palestinian desperation increased?  Not really.  So what gives?  I say nothin’.

Is this what was so important to the president to achieve?  To save face before the American people so he can tell them for the next three months there IS a peace process…until it breaks down once again as it invariably will.  I know he’s had a hard Asia trip and took a shellacking in the mid-terms.  But was this worth it?

You see, there is one major ingredient missing: commitment.  Not just Israel’s commitment, which is the major missing factor.  But surprising as it may seem, Obama’s commitment as well.  Like most other American presidents before him with the exception of Jimmy Carter and George Bush pere, they come in with blizzards of words and precious little in the way of real gumption.  In Middle East peace negotiation, you can’t get there without it.  And Obama definitely ain’t got it.  He’s got the razzle-dazzle.  He’s sort of a political version of the Shyne character I wrote about yesterday, with his [Shyne's] elegant fedora and shades.  But you need more than a glib tongue [Obama's] in this region.  You need deeds, you need heart, you need guts.  Obama’s got brain, but no brawn.

I was also concerned that Hillary Clinton’s statement after her latest love fest with Bibi in New York indicated that the U.S. had already negotiated away an issue key to the Palestinian interlocutors:

In the second, she spoke of an agreement that “reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state…

So all Bibi needs to say now is: the Yanks agreed we’re a Jewish state, why not the Palestinians?  I think the U.S. just gave Bibi an enormous hunk of halva with that $3-billion.

All Smiles at Sharm

Tuesday, September 14th, 2010
sharm peace talks

Hillary, Bibi and Mahmoud yuk it up at Sharm peace talks (Khaled El Fiqi/EPA)

Hillary Clinton and Bibi Netanyahu are shown all smiles today at the Sharm el Sheikh dog and pony show, in which Israel and the PA are attempting, with the intercession of various powers and allies like the U.S. Egypt, and Jordan, not to completely torpedo the chances of peace for the next five or ten years.  Yes, you can tell from my tone that I’m extremely skeptical.

First, you have the settlement freeze issue.  Bibi’s not going to extend it and Abbas claims he’ll walk out if he doesn’t.  But even if they overcome this biggie looming in the next two weeks (the deadline is September 26th), they’ve got to get down to tachliss sometime.  And man, that won’t be easy.

But the really egregious passage in today’s N.Y. Times report on the talks revealed just how clueless the American negotiators are:

Mrs. Clinton said she believed the two sides could find a creative solution to the impasse – steps that would allow the Palestinians to accept less than a full extension of the moratorium or could enable Mr. Netanyahu to sell an extension to his domestic constituency.

Among the options, American officials said, would be Palestinian recognition of Israel as the Jewish homeland..

Why, sure…the Palestinians will agree to this in a heartbeat.  Something not even all Jews agree with by the way.  And while we’re at it why don’t we demand that Israel recognize Palestine as a Muslim nation as well?

Yes, they’ll fudge things by using the term “Jewish homeland” rather than “Jewish nation,” assuming the Palestinians can agree to the vaguer term homeland.  But really, I have a much more fair formulation: let the Palestinians and Israeli agree together that Israel is a homeland for its Jewish AND Arab citizens.  First, it clearly IS.  Second, you simply cannot demand of the PA that it recognize Israel as a Jewish homeland while asking that it ignore the fact that there are 1-million Israeli Arab citizens for whom this state is their homeland.  The families of many of them predate the settlement of most Israeli Jews in this land.  So what does that make them?  Chopped-liver?

There is an air of delusion in these talks.  Granted that George Mitchell and perhaps even Hillary have the best of intentions and perhaps even the skill to pull this off.  But when you begin with premises like the one outlined above, it does make you wonder what they could be thinking.  Further, when they can be seen grasping at straws like this one, it makes you realize just how far apart both sides are and how impossible it will likely be to bridge those differences.

As far as I’m concerned, the ethnic definition of Israel or Palestine is something that is besides the point.  Why should recognizing Israel as Jewish even be part of the negotiations?  Yes, perhaps you reassure Israeli Jews to an extent if you get Palestinians to concede on this point.  But are the Americans even thinking about the unease with which this will be greeted by Israeli Palestinians AND those in the PA negotiating this deal?  The fact that they are grasping at irrelevancies is not a good sign.

One thing that is a good sign is that Mitchell flies afterward to Syria in an effort to sound out the parties about advancing Israel-Syria peace talks.  Given the saber-rattling on the northern border in the past few weeks, any such meetings can only be for the good.  The key is whether Israel is serious about peace with Syria.  Assad has already signalled his willingness to sue for peace as long as Israel returns the Golan.  It is Israel that has dithered, commenced a few wars in the interim, etc.  It’s up to Bibi and his far-right coalition.  As I wrote above, I’m dubious that he either can or wants to pull this off.  But who knows, if Obama pushes hard enough (unlikely I realize), a miracle might happen.

Demand International Investigation of Gaza Flotilla Massacre

Monday, May 31st, 2010

I’m hoping to join together with other peace activists and groups like Jewish Voice for Peace to create an international campaign that will have the following demands:

1. A Goldstone-like investigation of the massacre which would investigate culpability of the commander of the Israeli navy and defense minister for this incident (and charges of attacks by Flotilla activists against IDF)

2. Immediate release of bodies of the dead for independent forensic autopsy and burial by their families

3.  Immediate release of names of dead and injured (information presently embargoed by IDF censor)

4. Demand Obama cancel his meeting with Bibi immediately

5. Demand strong statement from Hillary Clinton and withdrawal of U.S. ambassador to match actions taken by EU nations

6. End Israeli siege of Gaza

Among other things, we can create a petition campaign and a Facebook group.  Let me know if you’re interested in joining in.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Settlements: The ‘Pause’ That Doesn’t Refresh

Wednesday, November 25th, 2009

The pause that refreshes.
Coca-Cola advertising slogan (1929) ranked 3rd best of the 20th century By Ad Age

The N.Y. Times headline tells it all Israel Offers a Pause in Building New Settlements. A pause is not a freeze. A pause ends with a resumption of whatever you were doing before. A freeze is something that stops you dead in your tracks. We all know where this is going and it ain’t a pretty place. Maybe a train wreck. Maybe a repetition of the same Groundhog Day type scenario that happened day after day for over 40 years.

Instead of singing hossanahs as Bibi expects Barack to do, let’s look at what the “pause” does not do. It does not stop East Jerusalem construction, which is some of the most incendiary and definitive in terms of poisoning a final negotiated settlement. Neither will this stop evictions from, and demolition of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem.

Palestinian laborer prays at site of Gilo settlement construction (Reuters)

Palestinian laborer prays for true settlement freeze at East Jerusalem construction site unaffected by 'pause' (Reuters)

The settlement freeze was originally meant as a way to freeze the political situation & allow all parties to take a step back & re-evaluate their priorities and agendas. This move does nothing toward that end. It allows the most toxic settlement construction to continue. It allow the continued expropriation of Palestinian property and land in the Holy City.

Further, the “pause” allows Israel to continue building 3,000 units currently under construction. Instead of the pause that refreshes, this should be known as the pause that does nothing. Statements like this only add insult to injury and indicate Bibi doesn’t give a crap about what Palestinians think. He’s merely preaching to his right-wing Israeli choir:

Mr. Netanyahu said that Israel was taking a “difficult” and “painful” step, and that he hoped the Palestinians and the Arab world would “seize this opportunity” to work toward peace.

If he prefers preaching to that choir let him make peace with Avigdor Lieberman or Moshe Feiglin. See if they can deliver Palestinian consent to this travesty of a pause.

At one time, I really believed the Obama administration could advance the peace process. But not with delusional statements like this from Madame Secretary:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the pause in construction “helps move forward” the peace process.

What in the world is she thinking or smoking? What peace process? And “forward?” Try backward. Try nothing. It does nothing. It fools no one. It’s a fig leaf that allows the U.S. and Israel to say they’ve achieved something when they’ve achieved nothing. In fact, it may be said that in raising expectations and disappointing so many, it’s actually set the alleged peace process backward. Certainly not forward.

The only slightly bright spot was Clinton’s reference to negotiations resuming based on 1967 borders. This is a position Israel detests and will avoid like the plague, especially a right wing government like Bibi’s which seeks to retain as much occupied territory as possible in any projected (more like “imagined”) peace agreement.

Michael Oren, that supposedly elegantly moderate Israeli ambassador has, as usual, revealed more than he realized in this statement:

Mr. Oren said Mr. Netanyahu’s decision to temporarily halt settlement construction was “a gesture, first of all, to the president of the United States. I can’t stress that enough.”

Indeed, this shows that Bibi has no interest in achieving peace, at least not with the Palestinians. Perhaps peace with Obama so he may be left to pursue his own agenda regarding the Iranians and Palestinians, but certainly not peace with Abbas or the PA. Who does Oren think Israel is going to make peace with? Obama?

After Mr. Netanyahu spoke, Israeli television news commentators said the settlement moratorium seemed aimed more at making peace with the Obama administration than with the Palestinian Authority.

Indeed. Bibi doesn’t give a crap about the Palestinians nor does he believe in peace. This is an incredibly cynical move on his part and the sad thing is that Obama seems to have fallen for it. In his defense, I’m sure he only praises this piece of Kabuki theater because he believes the parties can now get to the serious stuff of final status negotiations. But Bibi is way ahead of him. He’s not going to go to final status negotiations. And even if he does he’ll string that out for ages as all previous Israeli governments have done so well.

I feel sorry for George Mitchell, who’s been laboring under the heavy weight of trying to deliver a stillborn peace baby. He’s simply too intelligent and decent a man to believe a word of this statement he delivered:

“The steps announced by the prime minister are significant and could have substantial impact on the ground. For the first time ever, an Israeli government will stop housing approvals and all new construction of housing units and related infrastructure in West Bank settlements. That’s a positive development.”

I feel less sorry though for Daniel Levy, who should know better. He has no government position to defend as Mitchell does. Therefore, his Pollyanish optimism comes across as completely empty and hollow:

“The U.S. has taken a further step in laying out a program,” said Daniel Levy, a director of the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation in Washington. “What Netanyahu is not doing on settlements led the U.S. to be more forward-leaning in its language than it has ever been before.”

As one of the leading think tank doves and founder of J Street, Levy is abandoning a truly progressive position on this subject and throwing his weight behind an ephemera. We are far beyond a situation in which “forward-leaning language” (whatever that phrase means) will help the situation. The Palestinians and Arabs states will rightly say: “can a starving man eat words?” Give a starving man a meal, that is, something real he can sink his teeth into.

Language is just that, words. Anyone can string together pleasing words into elegant phrases that sound lovely to the ear. Obama did that in Cairo. We all (or most of us) were carried away by the sounds. But we’re beyond that now. We need deeds. And a “pause” is not a deed. It is theater.

Clinton State Department: Arab-Americans Need Not Apply

Sunday, November 23rd, 2008

I wish I could remember where I first read this critique of State Department personnel decisions regarding the Middle East.  In past administrations, you could find many Jews dealing with Israeli-Arab affairs: Aaron David Miller, Dennis Ross, Martin Indyk, Richard Haas, Dan Kurtzer, Sam Lewis, etc.  But I dare you to name a single Arab-American or Palestinian-American assigned to the same field.  Where are the Khalidis, Telhamis, Zogbys?  Why are we so gun-shy about having an authentic Arab voice inside the policy apparatus that devises strategy concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?  If there are Jews at the table why shouldn’t there be Arabs?

And just why is it that doing so would be considered so dangerous, so radical?  Why is it that Rashid Khalidi’s association with Obama was portrayed as if the future president consorted with a terrorist?  Have we so criminalized Arab-Americans in the American mind that they are forever etched there as dangerous jihadists?

With Hillary taking over at State the chances of opening up the diplomatic corps have narrowed considerably.  But someone will have to explain to me why Palestinians or Arab states in general should trust America as a honest broker if we can’t even include in our midst Arab-Americans as members of the foreign policy team?

It’s Madame Secretary for Hillary, But Which Hillary Will It Be?

Saturday, November 22nd, 2008

The N.Y. Times reports that Hillary Clinton has accepted Barack Obama’s invitation to be his secretary of state. This development will no doubt rankle some on the left who campaigned hard for Obama’s election.  I’m concerned too.  I wonder which Hillary will be secretary of state: the bellicose, saber-rattling presidential primary candidate who threatened to wipe out Iran; or the pragmatic, flexible Hillary we’d prefer to see fill that position.

The Times notes my special concern regarding her views on the Israeli-Arab conflict:

On Israel, the other chronic foreign policy issue that will bedevil the next secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton would bring baggage as well. She is seen as fiercely loyal to Israel, which can be both a plus and a minus, Middle East experts say.

While her pro-Israel record as a senator from New York might cause her to be viewed with suspicion in the Arab world, it could give her credibility to ask Israel to make tough choices for peace.

The argument is the same as the one made in favor of Rahm Emanuel’s appointment. Because of his pro-Israel bona fides when he called upon an Israeli prime minister or defense minister to stop settlements Israeli pols couldn’t dismiss him as a Johnny-come-lately naive American pol. He would be a force to be reckoned with.

So which Hillary will we get?  The one who never met a Separation Wall she didn’t like?  The one beloved of Aipac?  Or the one who can jawbone with the best of ‘em, including top IDF brass?  I believe she could be a very good secretary of state if she can distance herself from her campaign jingoism.  But the jury is definitely out on this one.

Hillary: From Foggy Bottom to the White House?

Saturday, November 15th, 2008

By now, everyone’s heard about Hillary’s quiet little tete a tete with Barack as SUV caravans careened through the streets of Chicago yesterday, and the speculation that he’s considering offering her a senior cabinet post such as secretary of state.

There are two interesting issues that arise for me.  First, this is a woman who wants to be president.  While secretary of state IS the most senior cabinet post it almost never is a path to the presidency.  In fact, there hasn’t been anyone in the 20th century (or perhaps ever) who followed that route to becoming president.  I just don’t see the American electorate warming to the idea of her as their president based on four or six years as secretary of state.  However, if she racked up some significant foreign policy achievements like negotiating an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and negotiated a peaceful resolution of Iran nuclear imbroglio, then her stock WOULD be highly priced.

Second, with Hillary in the cabinet that’s a whole lot of ego to fill a cabinet room.  Joe Biden is no slouch in that department either, plus his forte has been foreign policy.  So either Joe shuffles quietly off to Buffalo or there could be some pretty hot heads in the Obama cabinet.  I never thought I’d find anything John Bolton said to be worthy of attention.  But the Times does quote him saying something quite apt about this matter:

John Bolton…who forecasted as early as this past July that Mrs. Clinton could wind up at the State Department, laughed as he offered the incoming president this piece of advice: “Obama should remember the rule that you never hire anybody you can’t fire, especially as secretary of state.”

If he names her to this post, Hillary could be Obama’s Janet Reno, the high profile female cabinet officer he simply couldn’t fire no matter what she did or said.  She’d be bulletproof.  If they get along well and she succeeds in the job then this isn’t an issue.  But if not…

Clinton Fundraiser Considers McCain

Friday, June 13th, 2008

I’m filing this one under the “Say, what?” category:

Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a top Clinton fund-raiser, telecommunications entrepreneur and member of the Democratic national convention’s platform committee, said she had questions about Mr. Obama’s trustworthiness. If he does not answer them, Ms. de Rothschild said she would at least consider voting for Mr. McCain or even working for him.

“I love my country more than I love my party,” said Ms. de Rothschild, who said she had been receiving entreaties from both Mr. Obama’s and Mr. McCain’s backers. “I can’t just fall in line.”

Can this woman be serious? She’d cut off her nose to spite her face. What does McCain support that Clinton supports? Abortion? Fuhgedaboutdit. Gun control? Never. Women’s Rights? Hah. Maintaining a moderate Supreme Court? Are you kiddin’? Restoring the rule of law and appreciation for civil liberties? Nah.

If she supports McCain she won’t be loving her country, she’ll be acting out of spite and bile for Hillary’s loss. I’ve got news for her. I’ve been on the losing end of so many progressive political electoral battles going all the way back to 1968 I can’t begin to count. You don’t give up on your party because your idea of the perfect candidate failed.

People like this woman have lost all perspective and possibly their mind if they would do something as dumb as deserting their party for McCain. McCain has no major advisors who are women except the token Carly Fiorina. Obama, on the contrary, is a candidate who “gets” women’s issues and will fill his presidency with appointments of capable, competent women to key policymaking positions. There is something seriously wrong with those of Hillary’s supporters who don’t “get” this.