Part of my daily routine involves perusing Haaretz’s front page for the latest on Israeli diplomacy. On any normal day, one or two headlines baffle me and force me to question the news itself and the editor behind the screen. But today’s headlines are something else. So many of them set a new benchmark for hypocrisy and double standard. Allow me to elaborate.
Netanyahu welcomes Obama’s statements on Israel’s right to self-defense
PM Benjamin Netanyahu reacts postively to U.S. President Barack Obama’s AIPAC speech; Peres meets with Obama for 35 minutes after speech.
The right to self-defense is reserved for Israel only. After all, Obama’s administration, with a stamp of approval from Israel’s government, has gone to great lengths to avoid recognizing the Palestinian right to self-defense. It is a twisted world when the occupier is seen as the defenseless victim and the occupied is sanctioned for simply refusing to accept inequity.
Lieberman: Israel would offer aid to Syrians if asked
FM says that even without diplomatic ties, Israel cannot sit idly by while a massacre is taking place in a neighboring country.
Lieberman is wrong. In fact, he was among the many politicians who applauded Israel for its role in the 22-day invasion of Gaza in 2008-2009. The great humanitarian state of Israel may be responsible for a few field hospitals here and there but as long as it maintains an illegal, oppressive, and inhumane occupation of “a neighboring country”, its efforts will forever be in vain.
Chemi Shalev / Obama’s unequivocal support for Israel won’t sway his diehard detractors
U.S. president ups the ante on the use of military force against Iran. In his meeting with Netanyahu on Monday, he may go even farther.
Netanyahu’s cabinet might best be known for the number of times its complained about Obama and his supposed impartiality that doesn’t give Israel the upper hand. But I don’t see Obama meeting with any Palestinian leaders on a regular basis. Within three days, Obama speechified at AIPAC, met with Shimon Peres for 35 minutes (Israel’s supporters fetishingly count the minutes), and set the stage for a one-on-one with Netanyahu. Still, with the United States casting its own interests to the side and threatening a third war in less than ten years, a not-yet-satisfied Netanyahu will demand more.
Barak Ravid / Obama, Netanyahu brace for fateful White House meeting on Iran
The main objective of both Obama and Netanyahu is to prevent any possibility of misunderstandings or tensions during their Monday meeting at the Oval Office and the statements to the press.
In a true display of ignorance, Obama and Netanyahu have chosen to forego any talks about reality (i.e. the decades-long occupation of Palestine). Instead, they will focus on a hypothetical and overplayed threat.
Missing IDF solider found safe and sound in Eilat
Eshel Zilberstein found Israel’s southern city after his mother contacted him through the media. ‘I love him very very much, in case he forgot.’
The last line of the article goes “[t]he police and IDF conducted wide searches for the missing solider all day Sunday”. But while it dispatches search parties far and wide, the Israeli military raids West Bank villages, arrests adults and children alike, and detains them in unknown holding facilities for days and sometimes even longer. Israel sends a clear message: there can be no such thing as a missing Israeli but we reserve the right to create missing Palestinians.
If you substitute Israel for Palestine, Iran for Israel, enrichment for settlement building, and nuclear for peace, you get “Palestine told U.S. Israel must halt settlement building ahead of peace talks, sources say”. Indeed, this is what happened. But although this demand fell in line with international law, Israel refused to cooperate. Why, then, should Iran be expected to comply with Israel’s demands?
Just moments ago, Obama’s “unequivocal support for Israel” meant that he had earned Israel’s favor. He’s even drawn up military plans. And although the official U.S. position is more reserved than Israel’s, Iran’s nuclear capabilities have been exaggerated to such a degree that it doesn’t matter how conflicted the U.S. is.
Obama: All options remain on the table to prevent a nuclear Iran
U.S. President Barack Obama addresses AIPAC conference in Washington; staunchly defends his administration’s record on Israel, citing strong security and diplomatic assistance.
“Conflicting U.S. remarks”? Obama has made it clear enough. The only conflicting remarks are those made from within Israel’s administration to stifle debate and to guilt-trip the Obama administration into furthering its support of Israel’s hawkish diplomacy.
Peres: There is no U.S.-Israel divide on Iran nuclear issue
President Shimon Peres addresses AIPAC conference in Washington; says peace with the Palestinians can and must be achieved.
This just doesn’t make any sense. The AIPAC conference is charged with the task of extending public support for Israel in its current state of affairs. Ending the occupation has never been part of the conference’s itinerary. As for Iran, the U.S. has made its stance clear: it will act upon Israel’s whim. Again, the only inconsistency appears to be coming from within Israel’s circle of politico-elites.