Visiting in London to be seen with Margaret Thatcher, Rudy Giuliani proposes to promote Israel for NATO membership. Giuliani has a rationale for this proposal in that Israel is a democracy and NATO is an association that includes a lot of democracies.
But the underlying logic of Giuliani's position is that he's trying to be provocatively stupid so that people on the right will think of him as a "true conservative" despite his support for abortion rights and gay rights.
Glenn Greenwald argues that Giuliani's proposal is "extremist" and irrational because it commits the United States to treat all of Israel's wars as American wars and would be yet another way to commit the United States to endless war against our own interest.
Greenwald believes that other presidential candidates would pounce on Giuliani for this kind of fringe position if we lived "in a rational world." However, nobody has objected because of what Greenwald sees as the exaggerated significance of Israeli lobbies and Jewish money in American politics.
These factors might explain the silence from Democratic candidates and the mainstream media, but why is Giuliani articulating a point of view that's so contrary to American interests in the first place?
Obviously, Giuliani's "Israel in NATO" proposal is designed as an "almost-new" way (actually the proposal has been around for awhile) for Giuliani to promote himself as a friend of Israel and enemy of Israel's enemies. In that sense, Giuliani is just trying to differentiate himself from the intensely pro-Israeli positions of Mitt Romney, John McCain, and Fred Thompson.
But Giuliani is also making a finer political calculation here. He's betting that Fox, conservative talk show hosts, the right-wing blogosphere and their audiences will absolutely love the "Israel in NATO." It's apparently new. It's provocative. It provides an occasion for the right-wing media to accuse anybody who disagrees with being anti-Semitic. Above all, the right likes the flamboyant stupidity of the idea--the way that Giuliani is brushing aside any notion of patiently or cautiously pursuing American interests and just throwing all our weight behind Israel.
In the comic book world of the American right, this kind of weenie-ish macho posturing trumps rational self-interest every time. That's a lot of the reason the right used to love George Bush.
I don't know if "Israel in NATO" is going to make a big splash on the right. But Giuliani and his campaign team have shown that they can find their way to the hearts of the GOP right.
Giuliani might be able to survive hard-working Fred Thompson after all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Guiliani is bat-shit crazy. Israel as part of NATO?! What's next, Iraq on the UN Security Council because now they are a "democracy?"
I believe Israel is entitled to the area designated for and Israeli state by the UN in 1948. We should support that right. And when Israel suffers terrorist attacks, I support their right to defend themselves. But this issue is not quite so black and white as most US lawmakers in both parties tend to portray it.
Both Israel and the Palestinians are committing atrocities, however the cause of the conflict is the occupation, settlements and crimes against humanity committed by Israel on the Palestinians.
Here's what recent history tells us: Israel started three out of the four major wars with its Arab neighbors; Palestine was heavily populated long before Israel was founded; Israel is not a true democracy; its Muslim and Christian citizens do not have equal rights or protections.
The Israeli Palestinian conflict is a major threat to world peace. The last thing we need as a world community is a know-nothing, do-nothing ex-mayor of New York city pretending he has bigger cojones than the other Republican candidates with his "tough, no-nonsence" (read, no sence), words.
Someone might also remind the Mayor that people listen to the words of potential future Presidents of The United States. He might easily set events in motion that he never considered as he shot off his mouth.
What is needed with regard to our Israeli policy would be First,an immediate Israeli withdrawal from the Palestinian territories. Second, to demand that all aid for Israel be used only for removal of all settlements outside the 1948-49 internationally recognized borders, the development of a viable Palestinian State in the
West Bank and Gaza, and the return of the Golan Heights to Syria.
Given that Israel shows no sign of compromise on any of this and given the aforementioned religious persecution of non-Jews, I don't believe that a case could be made that Israel qualifies in any way for NATO membership.
The Palestinians have a right to a state, and the Israelis have a right to safety and security. Neither goal can be achieved with a military solution. Everyone must stand down, sit down, and negotiate.
This would put a stop to violence and terror on both sides so that things like last years kidnapping of Israeli soldiers and rocket attacks into Israel would not happen and if they should occur, we could more easily know whether the action is in retaliation for something the Israleis did or if, as it was ultimately determined, random acts of violence against Israel.
If people of good will in the international community will make the committment, then Israel and the Palestinians will be neighbors at peace with the security that every human being deserves.
If only those Jooooooooooooooos would quit defending themselves. I mean, Iran really just wants to be friends. Hezbollah and Hamas are peaceful people, once all of the Jooooooooooos are killed.
Israel is one of our strongest allies, along with England, and now Australia, bless John Howard and Tony Blair. The people of Israel have been victimized to an extent that it makes what others have gone through pale in comparison. It truly amazes me that the Jewish community remains so strongly Dem, when clearly only one side of the aisle truly stands side by side with them in their desire to allow Israel to maintain its existence.
Post a Comment