PDA

View Full Version : Post-Gaza, Pre-right wing resurgence, Israel embraks on a PR campaign



Grendel
03-18-2009, 06:13 PM
After Gaza, Israel Grapples With a Crisis of Isolation
By ETHAN BRONNER

JERUSALEM — Israel, whose founding idea was branded as racism by the United Nations General Assembly in 1975 and which faced an Arab boycott for decades, is no stranger to isolation. But in the weeks since its Gaza war, and as it prepares to inaugurate a hawkish right-wing government, it is facing its worst diplomatic crisis in two decades.

Examples abound. Its sports teams have met hostility and violent protests in Sweden, Spain and Turkey. Mauritania has closed Israel’s embassy.

Relations with Turkey, an important Muslim ally, have suffered severely. A group of top international judges and human rights investigators recently called for an inquiry into Israel’s actions in Gaza. “Israel Apartheid Week” drew participants in 54 cities around the world this month, twice the number of last year, according to its organizers. And even in the American Jewish community, albeit in its liberal wing, there is a chill.

The issue has not gone unnoticed here, but it has generated two distinct and somewhat contradictory reactions. On one hand, there is real concern. Global opinion surveys are being closely examined and the Foreign Ministry has been granted an extra $2 million to improve Israel’s image through cultural and information diplomacy.

“We will send well-known novelists and writers overseas, theater companies, exhibits,” said Arye Mekel, the ministry’s deputy director general for cultural affairs. “This way you show Israel’s prettier face, so we are not thought of purely in the context of war.”

But there is also a growing sense that outsiders do not understand Israel’s predicament, so criticism is dismissed.

“People here feel that no matter what you do you are going to be blamed for all the problems in the Middle East,” said Eytan Gilboa, a professor of politics and international communication at Bar Ilan University. “Even suicide bombings by Palestinians are seen as our fault for not establishing a Palestinian state.”

Of course, for Israel’s critics, including those who firmly support the existence of a Jewish state, the problem is not one of image but of policy. They point to four decades of occupation, the settling of half a million Israeli Jews on land captured in 1967, the economic strangling of Gaza for the past few years and the society’s growing indifference toward the creation of a Palestinian state as reasons Israel has lost favor abroad, and they say that no amount of image buffing will change that.

Israel’s use of enormous force in the Gaza war in January crystallized much of this criticism.

The issue of a Palestinian state is central to Israel’s reputation abroad, because so many governments and international organizations favor its establishment in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. And while the departing government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert negotiated for such a state, the incoming one of Benjamin Netanyahu says that item is not on its immediate agenda.

Javier Solana, foreign policy chief for the European Union, said in Brussels on Monday that the group would reconsider its relationship with Israel if it did not remain committed to establishing a Palestinian state.

Moreover, Mr. Netanyahu is expected to appoint Avigdor Lieberman, leader of the ultranationalist Yisrael Beiteinu party, as his foreign minister. This alone has Israelis and their allies in Europe and the United States worried because of Mr. Lieberman’s views of Israeli Arabs that some have called racist.

Mr. Lieberman had campaigned on the need for a loyalty oath in Israel so that those who did not support a Jewish democratic state would lose their citizenship. One-fifth of Israeli citizens are Arabs, and many do not support defining the state as Jewish.

Mr. Lieberman also has few fans in Egypt, which has acted as an intermediary for Israel in several matters. Some months ago Mr. Lieberman complained that President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt had not agreed to come to Israel. “If he doesn’t want to, he can go to hell,” he added.

“Imagine that Hossein Mousavi wins the Iranian presidency this spring and he names Mohammad Khatami as his foreign minister,” said Meir Javedanfar, an Iran analyst in Israel, referring to two Iranian leaders widely viewed as in the pragmatist camp. “With Lieberman as foreign minister here, Israel will have a much harder time demonstrating to the world that Iran is the destabilizing factor in the region.”

Of course, all of this is being seen in the context of a new, Democratic administration in the United States that has announced a desire to press for a two-state solution. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has already criticized Israeli plans to demolish Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem, and her department has criticized Israel’s banning of certain goods from Gaza.

This represents a distinct shift in tone from the Bush era. An internal Israeli Foreign Ministry report during the Gaza war noted that compared with others in the United States, “liberals and Democrats show far less enthusiasm for Israel and its leadership.”

The gap between Israelis and many liberal American Jews could be seen Tuesday in a blog by Bradley Burston, who writes on the Web site of the left-leaning newspaper Haaretz. He said that while visiting Los Angeles he faced many questions that amounted to “What is wrong with these people, your friends, the Israelis?”

He quoted an article by Anne Roiphe, an American Jewish liberal, which said that witnessing the popularity of Mr. Lieberman in Israel made her feel “as if my spouse had cheated on me with Mussolini.”

She added: “We here in America are waiting as of this writing for a government to emerge in Jerusalem, and most of us keep on hoping that its shape will not preclude the peace process, will not doom a two-state solution, will not destroy the hope that our new president brings to the table.”

Mr. Burston pointed to the thousands of rockets fired from Gaza into Sderot and other Israeli cities and towns and titled his piece “The Racist Israeli Fascist in Me.”

Some Israeli officials say they believe that what the country needs is to “rebrand” itself. They say Israel spends far too much time defending actions against its enemies. By doing so, they say, the narrative is always about conflict.

“When we show Sderot, others also see Gaza,” said Ido Aharoni, manager of a rebranding team at the Foreign Ministry. “Everything is twinned when seen through the conflict. The country needs to position itself as an attractive personality, to make outsiders see it in all its reality. Instead, we are focusing on crisis management. And that is never going to get us where we need to go over the long term.”

Mr. Gilboa, the political scientist, said branding was not enough.

“We need to do much more to educate the world about our situation,” he said. Regarding the extra $2 million budgeted for this, he said: “We need 50 million. We need 100 million.”The relatively small sum aside, if the Netanyahu administration is coming to power with the position that resolving the Israel/Palestinian conflict is "not on the immediate agenda" they might as well flush that money down the nearest toilet.

lunatic
03-20-2009, 07:27 PM
Grendel,

Why did you post that liberal article? Like normal people don't know already about double standard when it comes to the Jews and Israel. Holocaust wasn't just the German thing. World was, is and will be Jew-hating place in the Universe. Kudos to the Arabs (wasn't that Moscow's idea?) with the invention of "Palestinian people" - it's a permanent pain now that allows millions to openly hate Israel and blame evil Jews in the best tradition of Protocols. And who are protesting? Who like Hamas (Gaza=Hamas)? People from Spain? Or just Muslims from Spain? The country that's infamous for the Inquisition? And Turkey? The country that slowly but surely is moving back to its Ottoman Empire roots? Why the Turkish people do not protest their government stand on Armenian genocide instead? Sweden? I bet he meant Muslims in Sweden. And Swedish socialists that hate everybody. Investigation? Is it like that UN seminars where representatives of the regimes that fuck their own population on everyday basis sit around the table and say Zionism is racism? Those people? And don't get me start with the Arabs again. The opinion of thugs and assholes at the end of the day is still the opinion of thugs and assholes. Now they got a great support - 900 mil from the teleprompter president, whose friends are on the list of the biggest anti-Semites in the world. So why you posted this piece of article? To find out how many more sympathizers of the poor "Palestinians" are on this forum? Plenty. I got the fact you share the views with Ethan Samuel Bronner; after all he works for a toilet paper called The New York Times. I guess the only reason to post it here was to find out how pissed your opponents would be. I am not: I can't despise socialists who called themselves liberals any more.

P.S. As for American Jewish left-wingers: Hey schmucks, when they start pogroms, they don't ask who's left or right - they kill all Jews. Don't say you didn't know.

Luris Blear
03-20-2009, 07:39 PM
Those nutty right-wingers and their evil ways. Right wingerism should probably be illegal or something because you can always find someone else in the world who doesn't agree with it.

It might be easier to add the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/world/middleeast/21gaza.html?_r=1) to my RSS feeds and forgo a lot of these threads.

But to reply to this thread absolutely seriously:

Principles do not need friends.

Grendel
03-21-2009, 12:12 AM
Grendel,

Why did you post that liberal article? Like normal people don't know already about double standard when it comes to the Jews and Israel. Holocaust wasn't just the German thing. World was, is and will be Jew-hating place in the Universe.Lunatic, your understanding of these issues is as slanted as the so-called "Jew-hating place" you allege the world to be.

2/3 of the Israeli public want talks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/28/israelandthepalestinians) with Hamas even as rockets were falling on Sderot. They--as well as most people--realize that a two-state solution is actually more imperative (http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=What-the-demographics-in-the-Holy-Land-means-for-Israel.html&Itemid=127) to the Israelis than the Palestinians.

There's nothing liberal or conservative about pointing out the inherent flaw with the Netanyahu administration declaring a Palestinian state a secondary priority.

Grendel
03-21-2009, 12:17 AM
Those nutty right-wingers and their evil ways. Right wingerism should probably be illegal or something because you can always find someone else in the world who doesn't agree with it.LB, who's calling anyone "evil?" I don't think that's a particularly fair assessment. The issue, here, is an incoming administration making a highly unusual focus while seemingly backburner-ing the most salient issue it faces.

Foolish, maybe, but not evil.

Questioning a rather specific aspect of policy is worlds away form the sort of broadbrush attack you're implying.

lunatic
03-23-2009, 04:59 PM
Lunatic, your understanding of these issues is as slanted as the so-called "Jew-hating place" you allege the world to be.

2/3 of the Israeli public want talks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/28/israelandthepalestinians) with Hamas even as rockets were falling on Sderot. They--as well as most people--realize that a two-state solution is actually more imperative (http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=What-the-demographics-in-the-Holy-Land-means-for-Israel.html&Itemid=127) to the Israelis than the Palestinians.

There's nothing liberal or conservative about pointing out the inherent flaw with the Netanyahu administration declaring a Palestinian state a secondary priority.

Let ME deal with the Jew-hating world - I've been doing it for 4 decades, including America (I am not sure you even care) . If you think that Jew-hatred has never been number one problem in the Middle East you are not realistic to say the least.

Yes, Israel needs peace more than others. To spend more on science, technologies, agriculture, education, medicine, arts, etc. Israel could have given Denmark or Holland advices on how to be more successful - unfortunately, they (including my relatives and friends) should always put survival first. But should they give up too much for the sake of people who want them to disappear from the face of the planet - I highly doubt it.

Don't tell me the leftists/liberals look at the Israeli problems through the same eyes as non-liberals. In their eyes so-called Palestinians are always the victims of cruel militaristic power. That includes the suicidal Israeli Left. How many more Holocausts it will take for some Jews to realize that haters want everything: meaning - no Jews around. And that's why, in the normal world, the focus should have been on a hating side. What a two state solution can we seriously discuss when the opposite side is mix of Disorganized Crime and 7th century Extremist Mentality? On the paper the two state solution could exist. But why Arabs would voluntarily disassembly the victim hood that evidently brings so many dividends? For them the two state solution is losing to Israel and accepting more responsibilities - they aren't going to do it.

Portraying Israel as a bad guy in the conflict and pressing Israel to surrender to the unrealistic pro-Arab agenda - do you agree with that?

P.S. I'd like to talk to HAMAS too: "Hey, it seems to me, besides bloody hands, you also got something that looks like a head. Use it. Or I'll use mine for both. Now back to your bloody hands..."

Luris Blear
03-23-2009, 09:19 PM
The right wing is described as unpopular and hawkish.

The liberals are colored as "chilled", or scared. Of who? The article makes them look more afraid of their own right wing than of suicidal extremists.

Grendel
03-25-2009, 07:33 PM
Don't tell me the leftists/liberals look at the Israeli problems through the same eyes as non-liberals. In their eyes so-called Palestinians are always the victims of cruel militaristic power. That includes the suicidal Israeli Left.[QUOTE]The chief difference is not that people "always" see the Palestinians as being victimized, but that some are willing to acknowledge that both sides have committed egregious acts upon the other. Only to the most biased individual would recognizing that fact--and it is a fact--seem like taking sides.

And does that "suicidal Israeli left" you allege exists consist of the 2/3 of the population that wants direct talks? I imagine that would be news to them...

[QUOTE=lunatic]What a two state solution can we seriously discuss when the opposite side is mix of Disorganized Crime and 7th century Extremist Mentality? On the paper the two state solution could exist. But why Arabs would voluntarily disassembly the victim hood that evidently brings so many dividends? For them the two state solution is losing to Israel and accepting more responsibilities - they aren't going to do it.I highly doubt the people in Gaza and the West Bank feel like they're rolling in "dividends" behind blockades, walls, and countless checkpoints.


Portraying Israel as a bad guy in the conflict and pressing Israel to surrender to the unrealistic pro-Arab agenda - do you agree with that?I'm not even quite sure what you're attempting to get at with this statement. I don't see anyone here calling the Israeli government "the bad guy" in this conflict. What you so disparagingly describe as a "surrender" to a "pro-Arab" agenda is really Israel's only hope to exist, as it does now, beyond the next couple decades. If the opportunity for a two state solution is lost and the Holy Land--including the strip and the occupied territories in the West Bank--exists as a single state, that's pretty much the end. Population growth patterns already see a near even spilt if not an Arab majority in the region, and that gap will only continue to widen. Without Palestinian statehood, the Arab citizens will simply vote their own representatives into the majority of government seats. Unless of course, some measures are taken to deny them the right to vote. The US is Israel's staunchest ally, but that will not last if the government disenfranchises a majority of the people in order to maintain control.

lunatic
03-30-2009, 07:02 PM
[QUOTE=lunatic;805113]Don't tell me the leftists/liberals look at the Israeli problems through the same eyes as non-liberals. In their eyes so-called Palestinians are always the victims of cruel militaristic power. That includes the suicidal Israeli Left.[QUOTE]The chief difference is not that people "always" see the Palestinians as being victimized, but that some are willing to acknowledge that both sides have committed egregious acts upon the other. Only to the most biased individual would recognizing that fact--and it is a fact--seem like taking sides.

And does that "suicidal Israeli left" you allege exists consist of the 2/3 of the population that wants direct talks? I imagine that would be news to them...

I highly doubt the people in Gaza and the West Bank feel like they're rolling in "dividends" behind blockades, walls, and countless checkpoints.

I'm not even quite sure what you're attempting to get at with this statement. I don't see anyone here calling the Israeli government "the bad guy" in this conflict. What you so disparagingly describe as a "surrender" to a "pro-Arab" agenda is really Israel's only hope to exist, as it does now, beyond the next couple decades. If the opportunity for a two state solution is lost and the Holy Land--including the strip and the occupied territories in the West Bank--exists as a single state, that's pretty much the end. Population growth patterns already see a near even spilt if not an Arab majority in the region, and that gap will only continue to widen. Without Palestinian statehood, the Arab citizens will simply vote their own representatives into the majority of government seats. Unless of course, some measures are taken to deny them the right to vote. The US is Israel's staunchest ally, but that will not last if the government disenfranchises a majority of the people in order to maintain control.

1. Left is suicidal when it counts on "the partners" in a peace process. And when they think socialism will work for Jews.
2/3 Israelis want to talk to stop HAMAS activities - it does not mean they want to give up. And if you believe in polls so much, do you agree that majority of Arabs want a solution with no Jewish state by any means?

2. Your views of "Palestinians" as victims only with walls and blockades prove you are not objective enough to play that game . Nothing wrong with the idea of an isolation from a contagious disease - why not to build a wall between self and those who live to destroy you? Occupation - another double standard on your part. Russia still got Kuril islands that belonged to Japan and Keninsberg that was the Prussian city. They occupied them during WWII and it's still theirs. The fact that there's no more open hatred between those nations does not mean you have to apply different rules towards Israel unless you fully agree with anti-Jewish Arabs/the majority of anti-Semitic world's agenda.

3. You are saying that Israel has no choice but beg for two state solution then demographically they might have a chance. It sounds like you do not want the Arabs to eat shit that they deserve and fix their own problems and stop lies. Especially stop being leaders in the world wide extremist Islamic movement. That's the root of the problem.

4. Dividends - world wide welfare for the rulers. Permanent revolution (as Trotsky would call it) on someone else money. Why to govern properly when you can blame "the aggressor" and put the money on your Swiss bank accounts?

Grendel
03-30-2009, 07:37 PM
Your views of "Palestinians" as victims only with walls and blockades prove you are not objective enough to play that game . [QUOTE]Kindly cite where I stated that that is the "only" perspective to have of the Palestinians, or how your claim can be reconciled with my explicit statement "that both sides have committed egregious acts upon the other."

[QUOTE=lunatic]It sounds like you do not want the Arabs to eat shit that they deserveDisgusting, bigoted rhetoric such as that has no place in this discussion.

lunatic
03-30-2009, 08:03 PM
[QUOTE=lunatic;807510]Your views of "Palestinians" as victims only with walls and blockades prove you are not objective enough to play that game . [QUOTE]Kindly cite where I stated that that is the "only" perspective to have of the Palestinians, or how your claim can be reconciled with my explicit statement "that both sides have committed egregious acts upon the other."

Disgusting, bigoted rhetoric such as that has no place in this discussion.

Really? So, only politically correct language is acceptable?

The Arabs must deal with their own garbage: extremism, nationalism, ideology and idiotic strategies and tactics.

Grendel
03-31-2009, 05:47 PM
Really? So, only politically correct language is acceptable?Refraining from profane attacks on an entire ethnic group can hardly be considered "political correctness."

lunatic
04-06-2009, 06:12 PM
Refraining from profane attacks on an entire ethnic group can hardly be considered "political correctness."

What if it's only that ethnic group?

What if the criticism is real and urgent and silence is not an option? How many bad things would never happened if someone stood for the decency, principles and values?

P.S. I am never shy to criticize my own - horrible Jews are horrible Jews. So fuck you, George Soros.

Grendel
04-07-2009, 12:19 AM
What if it's only that ethnic group?

What if the criticism is real and urgent and silence is not an option? How many bad things would never happened if someone stood for the decency, principles and values?The problem, friend, is that there is no issue that applies to all members of a given ethnicity, religion, etc., and--as much as it stuns me to have to make this point--as such, telling an entire population to "eat shit" is wholly inappropriate.

lunatic
04-07-2009, 03:52 PM
The problem, friend, is that there is no issue that applies to all members of a given ethnicity, religion, etc., and--as much as it stuns me to have to make this point--as such, telling an entire population to "eat shit" is wholly inappropriate.


This is what makes me different from those lucky ones who never experienced brutal awakenings and faced unpleasant "shit" on everyday basis.

First of all, I do believe in a collective responsibility: what's up with that "innocent people" crap? Yes, we tried to survive and many of us did not commit the "bloody and dirty" stuff that takes place in totalitarian states. But, with the great exception of a few dissidents, all adults were responsible. For doing nothing as well. The bravest thing many of us did was to whisper political anecdotes in the kitchen to the closest friends (unlike Stalin's era no one got punished just for telling anecdotes). Yes, I never been a member of Communist Party or "worked" for KGB but don't take my responsibility away and call me an innocent just for that.

(I don't believe in a collective punishment - but I believe in nuremberg trials for those who were directly responsible for the atrocities and injustice. It never happened in Russia, unlike Germany. Kremlin's archives could've said much more, possibly minimizing the appeal of socialist ideas for those who are affected by them.)

So 20 years ago, as a result, I and many others did eat lotsa shit. That includes disappointments, re-evaluations, struggles, anger, wake up calls, re-sets, divisions, new types of hatred, little anarchy, lack of common sense and logic, new lies, and reality acceptance. We're bad guys just by being a part of it - we tried, differently, to change that status. We called ourselves "soviets" to underline multi-ethnical society, not just Russians (many, as usual, blame Jews for everything, but it's a different topic).

I strongly believe the Arabs, historically and logically, are the bad guys in that conflict, collectively responsible for inflaming wars and confrontations and insisting on finishing Hitler's goals. If they want to change anything to the better, they got to eat a lot of shit like we did - there're no miracles of easy changes without paying the debts. For you I'd like to change the word shit to the word pain.

As for Israelis (you mentioned it): they're ready to talk. The only thing they need is a realistic hatred-free partner. It's possible, we're cousins after all. It's hard but possible. As much possible, I must add, as new holocausts and world wars.