9 thoughts on “Deep State Avenges Bibi’s Rejection of U.S.-Arab Peace Deal – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. “…..While I dislike the term Deep State used in this context because it refers generally to reactionary elements of totalitarian regimes seeking to impede reformist impulses…..”

    There is also the Peter Dale Scott definition of the “deep politics” that a deep state carries out:

    1. a system or practice of politics in which accountability is consciously diminished.
    2. generally, covert politics, the conduct of public affairs not by rational debate and responsible decision-making but by indirection, collusion, and deceit…
    3. the political exploitation of irresponsible agencies or parastructures, such as intelligence agencies… Ex.
    ‘The Nixon doctrine, viewed in retrospect, represented the application of parapolitics on a hitherto unprecedented scale.’
    ‘Democracy and parapolitics, even in foreign affairs, are ultimately incompatible.’

    He called it “parapolitics” in his 1972 book “The War Conspiracy”; then later broadened it in 1996 to “….all those political practices and arrangements, deliberate or not, which are usually repressed rather than acknowledged.”

    Agree or disagree with everything written above, it seems very likely that Trump will either quit out of frustration because the intelligence agencies, the judiciary, and the military won’t carry out his crazy commands; or he will be forced to resign under the 25th Amendment or under a plea by the GOP to resign “for the good of the country”, and he gets to spend the rest of the decade dealing with all of his lawsuits.

    1. Of couse there are other ways things could move along – Corey Robin has three possibilities: Trump keeps this crazy system of “hyperactive belligerence while accomplishing nothing” (my phrase, not Robin’s) going for four years, or they find a fixer in the James Baker mold to make the presidency look like it’s working and hide the stupidity, or they start a war.

      (source: http://coreyrobin.com/2017/02/14/3-ways-forward-for-trump/)

        1. Masha Gessen IMHO would be incorrect in that claim. At least three cases come to mind, off the too of my head.

          Pinochet in Chile, Franco in Spain, Salazar in Portugal. All three were very careful to stay out of any war once they consolidated power.

        2. I meant “moving along” in a neutral sense, and you are right that most of them are negative outcomes. Trump’s presidency is a rudderless ship in a stormy sea; I don’t think he has the long-range strategic planning ability to concoct a war against Iran out of the whole cloth. He lacks the ideological fervor of Bush’s neocons to invade Iraq to make a pro-US zone in an oil-rich country. All of his past businesses have been simple; the pointless border wall is another simple (yet habitat-damaging) idea. He never expected to win the office, and now there, he is overwhelmed by it. I expect nothing but half-baked ideas and choices taken out of expediency.

  2. “Haaretz reveals that Secretary of State John Kerry organized a secret peace conference last February, including Jordan’s King Abdullah and Egypt’s dictator, Abdel Fatah al-Sisi at which he presented a peace plan modeled on the Arab initiative which would’ve guaranteed recognition by all Arab states of Israel as a Jewish state. It also would’ve designated Jerusalem as a joint capital in which international commitments would ensure holy places would be accessible to all parties, the security of any settlement blocs would be guaranteed, all future claims against Israel would be abrogated, and the Palestinian Right of Return would be realized only within the new Palestinian state.”

    This is a very promising plan but the ones making all the concessions in the name of the Palestinians are not the Palestinians themselves. What good is such a plan than? yet another game that was suppose to show how the USA and its alias are committed to peace.

    and speaking of games, If Bibi agreed and the Palestinians didn’t (and why should they? they did not make those concessions) than what you have is Bibi changing his starting point for future negotiations without getting anything in return. Not a very wise political move.

    Any “deal” which is not the fruit of direct negotiation between the main players is doomed to fail. You can of course force one party to accept a certain solution but that is a different story and is also not likely to work.

    1. As a practicing litigator, I can tell you that most cases are settled between the parties themselves.
      Intractable cases go before a trial judge, who usually negotiates an amicable settlement. After both sides give up something, lawyers and clients shake each others’ hands and go home.

      A small minority of case go to a trial and verdict, and one side goes home very mad, but not before filing an appeal,
      i.e. ’round-two’.

  3. The reason why this has been leaked is pretty obvious.

    Netanyahu is currently trying to convince Trump that an “outside in” strategy is worthwhile pursuing, if only because it hasn’t been tried before.

    Kerry’s Gang ™ has leaked this information to show everyone – including Trump, if he cares to listen – that Netanyahu is blowing smoke in Trump’s eyes. Kerry Has Already Tried The Outside In Approach, and all that happened is that Netanyahu turned the plan down.

    As he was always going to do, and as he always will do.

    Trump should draw the obvious conclusion – Netanyahu is running a scam and he is the next patsy.

    The “outside in” strategy is a waste of time because all that will happen is exactly the same thing that happened when Kerry tried it i.e. a lot of time will be spent and then Netanyahu will throw the result in the bin.

    And all the while the bulldozers will keep doin’ their thing….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link