First it was the myth about linkage between Iran and Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking.
According to the logic, without progress on the Palestinian front, it would be impossible to mobilize Arab countries to face the Iranian nuclear threat.
The notion had shelf life, sustained by some diplomats and the commentariat until it was blown out of the water by the WikiLeaks revelations.
Of course, it was no secret that Arab leaders feared Iran's growing power and made not the slightest connection between the two issues. Anyone who met with an Arab official from Riyadh to Rabat heard the same dread about the looming prospect of a nuclear-armed Shiite theocracy in Tehran.
But in today's world, facts don't necessarily have any claim on fiction, until they become so incontrovertible that there's no easy way around them.
And that's just what WikiLeaks proved.
Lo and behold, the cables revealed that from Saudi Arabia to Bahrain, from the United Arab Emirates to Egypt, Arab leaders were imploring the United States to stiffen its spine and confront the Iranians. Linkage to the Palestinian question? Not even close. No mention whatsoever.
To the contrary, several Arab countries have looked to Israel, with or without a peace agreement, as a stealth ally in the face-off with Iran.
Another myth was about settlement-building in eastern Jerusalem.
According to that one, the peace process was going to wither on the vine and die because Israel indicated its intention to continue construction within Jewish neighborhoods.
Israel was criticized, pilloried, and pummeled for its actions, accused not only of being an obstacle to peace, but the obstacle. The reality on the ground seemed not to matter. The world was led to believe that the very future of the Middle East hinged on Israel's alleged misbehavior.
Israel attempted to explain that both sides understood there would be border adjustments in a peace accord reflecting demographic realities on the ground, but this mattered not a whit. And it had even less success when it reminded the world that settlements, certainly an issue for negotiations, was by no means the only one - and certainly not a sufficient explanation for more than six decades of overwhelming Arab refusal to come to terms with Israel's very right to exist.
Then came PaliLeaks, and the myth was blown out of the water.
The documents showed there was indeed tacit agreement on certain land swaps, including, yes, Jewish areas of eastern Jerusalem. The papers showed that the gap between the two sides was less than imagined, but, sadly, the uproar over the leaked documents proved that the Palestinian Authority has failed even to attempt to prepare its population for the concessions needed for an end of conflict and lasting peace.
And last it was the myth loudly stated by Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan that the root of all problems in the Middle East lies with Israel's intransigence.
To accept the Turkish leader's premise means throwing truth to the wind. Even a cursory study of the Arab world reveals deep-rooted problems having nothing to do with Israel and everything to do with political, economic, and social stasis. But that would have spoiled the appealing narrative.
After all, it is much more reassuring for the Erdogans of the world to lift responsibility from Arab shoulders and place it squarely on Israel's! And for the Israel-bashers, of whom there is no shortage, anything suggesting Israeli culpability is greeted with endless expressions of glee and gratitude.
Who needs critical-thinking skills when criticism of Israel is so much more effortless and satisfying?
Yet this myth, too, has been exposed in recent weeks for all the world to see.
The streets of Tunisia, Egypt, and Yemen filled with crowds rising up against domestic repression, the absence of opportunity, and the culture of cronyism and corruption.
Though none of the "after-the-fact experts" foresaw it, why, Erdogan aside, should that have come as a surprise?
All it took was a casual reading of the UN Arab Human Development Report, compiled by Arab scholars and published regularly by the world body, and other relevant material. I draw below from an article I wrote 13 months ago in The Huffington Post entitled "It's not about Israel."
They [the report's authors] have spoken of three overarching explanatory factors for the region's unsatisfactory condition: the knowledge deficit, the gender deficit and the freedom deficit.
Unless these three areas are addressed in a sustained manner, the Middle East, which ought to be one of the world's most dynamic regions, is likely to continue suffering from instability, violence and fundamentalism, irrespective of what happens on the Israeli-Palestinian front.
Consider some of the important findings in recent Arab Human Development Reports and related studies:
• The total number of books translated into Arabic in the last 1,000 years is fewer than those translated into Spanish in one year.
• Greece -- with a population of fewer than 11 million -- translates five times as many books from abroad into Greek annually as the 22 Arab countries combined, with a total population of more than 300 million, translate into Arabic.
• According to a Council on Foreign Relations report, "In the 1950s, per-capita income in Egypt was similar to South Korea, whereas Egypt's per-capita income today is less than 20 percent of South Korea's. Saudi Arabia had a higher gross domestic product than Taiwan in the 1950s; today, it is about 50 percent of Taiwan's."
As Dr. A.B. Zahlan, a Palestinian physicist, has noted: "A regressive political culture is at the root of the Arab world's failure to fund scientific research or to sustain a vibrant, innovative community of scientists." He further asserted that "Egypt, in 1950, had more engineers than all of China." That is hardly the case today.
The UN Human Development Report reveals that only two Egyptians per million people were granted patents, compared to 30 in Greece and 35 in Israel (for Syria, the figure was zero).
Similarly, the adult literacy rate for women aged 15 and older was 43.6 percent in Egypt and 74 percent in Syria, while for the world's top 20 countries it was nearly 100 percent.
And finally, according to Freedom House rankings, no Arab country in the Middle East is listed as "free." Each is described as "partly free" at best, "not free" at worst.
The sad truth is that it is precisely political oppression, intellectual suffocation, and gender discrimination that explain, far more than any other factor, the chronic difficulties of the Middle East.
There exist no overnight or over-the-counter remedies for these maladies that would allow the region to unleash its vast potential, but one thing is clear: they, not the straw man of Israel, are at the heart of the problem.
It would be illusory to think otherwise.
The illusions, or myths, prevailed until the throngs in the Arab streets shattered them.
Like bowling pins, the myths keep falling. It remains to be seen whether they'll be replaced by new ones, or, at long last, by a dose of reality.
I suspect that the anti-Israel myths will be replaced by new ones. “Israel is a nation by reason only of his religion, by his possession of the Torah. (Saadyah Gaon, 933). The truth claims of certain religions and ideologies have never been able to accommodate Israel’s equality. Facts might change but the hate doesn’t
And the truth shall set them free.
1) The world believed that the Sunni feudal lords of KSA and the Shi'a hybrid government of Iran were all part of the harmonious Muslim kumbaya party bound together by the Israeli land grab. There may be an inordinately large amount of Americans who believed this but , well, 50% of Americans believe in creationism and space ships.
2) Settlement are legal-They aren't, except by Israeli law and even there it was once tenuous before the whole country became one giant reactionary embarrassment. Harris seemed like he wanted to make some other point about settlements and how they had no affect on the 'peace process' but that's just so stoooopid it doesn't look like he actually suggested they didn't.
3) The "PaliLeaks" (was that his third myth-he's not all that articulate or clear) proved that regardless how many concessions the feckless Abbas offered up the Israeli simply see this as another opportunity to push for more. So...what myth was that?
I'm not sure if Erdogan ever made the statement Mr. Mouthpiece attributed to him but he is entirely capable of such bombastic statements. They do, however, lack the power of creating any myths. :))
Lets blow up this myth-KSA and Israel are enemies. There are united in their desire to maintain the status quo and both are loyal supporters of every autocratic regime in the region.
For those unaware Mr. Harris and AJC said the humanitrains, on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla massacre, had "automatic weapons."
Why did the Knesset have a discussion on the Boycott/Divest/Sanction movement? It is not a very large or particularly effective action on its own. However, combined with nonviolent protest, flotillas, and other actions--it can have an effect. Even if protestors are shot/accused of violence/arrested/temporarily silenced. No matter how big and well-funded the PR machine is, no matter the believers like Mr. Harris--who is entitled to his opinion-- it all works together to show what the emperor is actually wearing.
B.D.S
According to Jazeera & its European branch, the “papers” reveal meek Palestinian negotiators making huge concessions. For those who actually READ the “papers” (those few that were selectively published – out of a declared “trove” of 1,600!), the picture is entirely different. In fact, Jazeera's commentary & the documents themselves are as different as chalk & cheese!
The “big concession” made by PA negotiators was accepting to swap 1.9% of West Bank for territory “of identical size & value” from within Israel. In other words, their "huge concession" was accepting 98.1%+1.9% instead of 100%!
Jazeera & Guardian also claim PA negotiators conceded the “right of return”. That’s a blatant lie. In fact, NOTHING in the “papers” so far published shows PA negotiators conceding ANYTHING to Israelis on the “return” front. The so-called concession is contained in minutes of an INTERNAL Palestinian discussion, in which Abbas expresses his belief that it'd be unrealistic to expect Israel to “take back 5 million refugees, or even 1 million”. How's an off-the-record internal discussion “a concession to Israel”??
What the “papers” do show clearly (but Jazeera/Guardian prefer to ignore in their comments!) is the extent of Israeli concessions: Olmert's proposal rejected by Abbas ( www.guardian.co.uk/world/palestine-papers-documents/4736 ) offered Palestinians 93.2% of West Bank+5.5% swap land from Israel (all contiguous!)+West Bank-Gaza “corridor”...
On a side note, I wonder if the Egyptian people will thank their Jewish supporters for their success in evicting their Pharaoh. They can write a thank you note to the Jewish CEO of Facebook, Mr. Zuckerberg, they can instant message their thanks to the 4 Israelis who invented IM which was critical in keeping the protesters connected. Google marketing executive Wael Ghonim will, I'm sure thank his Jewish boss Sergei Brin for supporting him in his critical role in the protests.
If the Egyptians do say 'thanks', then I'm sure the world Jewish population will say 'you are welcome'.
No lie here.
Of all the nations right now that posses these weapons she has and is the most unlikely to cooperate with any regulations or disarmament of these weapon types?
Why...because she is a colony of Jews. It is her final stand...give me what I want or I shall bring nuclear death.
You are right...she is no threat at all to the international community.
So you call Mr. Harris a liar for... quoting Wikileaks documents showing Arab leaders fearing the Iranian nuclear threat.
On the other hand, you know the truth because...
a) You've personally inspected Iran's nuclear facilities?
b) You've personally performed a lie detector test on Mahmoud Ahmedinejad?
c) You (MarcEdward) ARE Mahmoud Ahmedinejad?
d) Iran's rulers are Muslim (at least according to their definition) and hence can do no wrong?
e) You've absolutely no idea what the truth is, but calling an Israel-supporter a liar is a reflex you can't control?
f) All of the above?
You (ought to) know that any conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran has to do with the Saudis being angry that in any country, any where on earth, Shia Muslim are allowed to rule themselves and not be under the Sunni thumb. That's why the Saudis were sending terrorists into Iraq during the occupation to murder Iraqi Shia.
re: Iran and nukes - Iran has no nukes, we know this for a fact, because they have done no nuclear testing whatsoever. Iran could get nukes (Israel has been "predicting" for 20 years that Iran is "2 years away from having a nuke") but no time soon. It would be impossible for Iran to create a "surprise nuke", as creating a nuclear weapon you can depend on requires a test, and no nuclear test can go undetected.
So, my friend, there is no "Iranian Nuclear Threat"
Now, just to pile on, Iran has no reason to go to war with Israel. Iran could not survive an Israeli nuclear counterstrike. Iran and Israel share no common border. Israel is no threat to Iran as Israel could never invade or occupy Iran. The "Iran/Israel looming war" thing is horse manure. Neither country has anything to gain from a war.
http://www.israelactivism.com/
And I havent' yet mentioned the hasbara handbooks ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaphone_desktop_tool
"Turkey Gaza flotilla probe: Five shot dead at close range
Turkey's report on Israel's deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla was released Friday; report says Israel blatantly violated international laws. "
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/turkey-gaza-flotilla-probe-five-shot-dead-at-close-range-1.342805
If the current events in Tunisia and Egypt (and hopefully other Arab countries) prove anything, they prove how ridiculous such claims are.
But one did not have to wait for the current upheaval, to get proof that such claims are rubbish. The Arab world is (unfortunately) full of dictators; some of whom are on the surface “pro-Western” (and hence enjoy US “support”); others that are fiercely anti-Western – but are even worse tyrants. In fact, while the latest two Egyptian dictators were “friendly” to the US, the previous ones were not. Nor are the ruling despots of Syria, Libya, Sudan or pre-2001 Iraq.
I certainly believe that the US policy was wrong in fostering "alliances" with dictators that are both morally despicable and -- in practice -- unreliable. But trying to blame tyranny on "US support" is nothing but BS. What generates and maintains despotism in the Arab world is not USA and certainly not Israel; it is the usual vicious circle: poor levels of education in the populace allow dictators to grab the power in the first place; next, those same despots carefully maintain poor levels of education, so they can stay in power.
Claiming that the USA does not support despots is also silly.
So let's look at the second 'exploded myth', oh, say, here's another case of a US (and Israeli) supported dictator (after all what do you call someone who refuses to let power swing to someone else just because the majority of voters say that is what they want?) being willing to say one thing in private, but saying the opposite in public, for fear of being overthrown.
As for the third myth, well, it is true that not every festering problem in the ME can be traced back to Israeli intransigence, though if you posit that the US support for the dictatorships of the region can be traced back to a decision that it was easier to maintain them than to have to deal with the fallout of governments insisting that a country that is in their midst should face sanctions until it accepts that it lives in a world where the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, and other such international laws apply to all nations, and limit what they can do, at which point it becomes pretty hard to find a problem that doesn't trace at least partly back to that problem.
So tell us David, did you know that Israel actively promoted totalitarianism around it so that it would look good by comparison and be able to keep the Arab masses underdeveloped?
I would not worry too much about the Arabs falling behind developmentally - they have Iran and Turkey to learn from now: "A 2010 Canadian report on 'geo-political shift in knowledge creation' claims scientific output has grown 11 times faster in Iran than the world average, faster than any other country (Turkey ranks high in the data, too)." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sharmine-narwani/the-new-middle-east-narra_b_788703.html
LOTS of possibilities emerge now that Arabs are liberating themselves from the USraeli yoke. Enjoy!
""This tragedy on the high seas could have been avoided, and we regret the loss of life,” said AJC Executive Director David Harris. “The fact that the flotilla refused to cooperate with Israel’s repeated entreaties to unload their humanitarian cargo in Ashdod for delivery to Gaza proves that violent clashes are exactly what the international supporters of Hamas must have been seeking.
When Israeli commandos boarded the ships, they were met with violence from a supposedly non-violent group, including gunfire from automatic weapons and attacks with knives and axes. Several Israelis were wounded. As a result of the clash triggered by the pro-Hamas group, a number of them were killed or wounded in the confrontation."
http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=849241&ct=8418965
So group A trusts group C, or not. It is that simple.
Tell me that an Israeli would have done anything different if they wanted something, and then maybe you would have an argument.