EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

MJ Rosenberg

MJ Rosenberg

Posted: December 11, 2009 08:03 PM

Obama at Oslo: Israel Exempt From International Standards

What's Your Reaction:

I am one of those who believe that President Barack Obama actually deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. He deserved it because, in the months since assuming the presidency, he restored the United States from a nation "gone rogue" into the one it has been throughout its history. That is, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, a nation with "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind."

Under the previous administration of Bush, Cheney, and the Neocons, the United States had operated with no respect for international organizations or international opinion. We did what we wanted to do, when we wanted to do it.

Barack Obama ended that ugly epoch. And for that he deserves the Nobel and the gratitude of humanity.

This is not to say that Obama has ended America's over-reliance on war, rather than on diplomacy, as the means to confront our enemies. No matter whether one supports or opposes the Afghanistan surge, it is still an escalation of war. We remain in Iraq. Americans are still being killed and are killing in wars that many consider unnecessary.

But there is simply no comparison between an administration that approaches war with trepidation and exhaustive consideration and the Neocon administration which sent Americans off to fight with glee. (Remember Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle pushing war with Iraq - which they knew had nothing to do with 9/11 - as early as 9/12?).

Obama's speech in Oslo was brilliant. I am not surprised that he wrote it himself. He had to somehow accept an award, which most Americans believe was given prematurely, without seeming, in any way, arrogant or even proud to receive it. He also had to accept the Nobel Peace Prize weeks after escalating a war.

He is the only person in his administration capable of writing a speech that would thread that needle. Obama again demonstrates that his is that very rare administration in which the President is the most intelligent and talented player.

In fact, the coming of Obama might cause President John F. Kennedy, if he were here, to amend the toast he offered when he hosted a dinner for Nobel laureates back in 1962.

He said, "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House - with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

And yet, I have one significant problem with Obama's speech. It contained one gaping element of hypocrisy. It concerns Israelis and Palestinians.

In his speech, the President essentially called for peace and justice while describing situations in which war is both unavoidable and justified. He also described situations in which, to avoid war, the international community must "stand together as one" to rectify egregious injustice.

For instance, he said this: "I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to actually change behavior -- for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure -- and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one."

But he does not apply that standard to Israel and its illegal occupation of the territories it won in the 1967 war. Not only is Israel not held accountable, but the Obama administration actually blocks efforts to hold it accountable (i.e., the Goldstone report on war crimes in Gaza). The Obama administration even backed away from its demand that settlement activity stop. Additionally, the world community knows that the United Nations is helpless in dealing with Israel because the United States uses its veto on Israel's behalf whenever Israel asks it to.

So where's the accountability?

Obama said the following, describing a just war. "War is justified only when certain conditions were met: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence."

And yet the Obama administration defended the Gaza war which, to many, epitomized the disproportionate use of force. The casualty figures alone tell the story - 1400 Palestinian dead (320 of them children) compared to 13 Israelis, four killed by friendly fire. As for the provocation, while it is true that no country would allow incessant rocket fire on a civilian area, it is also true that responding to clumsy inaccurate rockets with the full force of the Israeli army was reckless and disproportionate by any standard.

Then there is this from President Obama on nuclear proliferation: "Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war."

But, of course, when it comes to Israel's nuclear arsenal, our entire policy consists of averting our eyes. The United States both pretends that Israel has no bombs and ignores Israel's refusal to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Even though addressing Israel's nuclear bombs in some form might advance our efforts to deter an Iranian bomb, we refuse to do it. Is it any wonder that the Iranians take our non-proliferation demands with a large grain of salt?

I'll stop there because America's hypocrisy when it comes to Israel and the Palestinians is well-known. Even some Palestinians almost forgive Obama for it. More than one has told me, "What can he do? He can't fight the lobby."

But, of course he can. And he would prevail.

And he must, but not only for the sake of the Palestinians. Or for the sake of the United States whose interests are hurt worldwide by our one-sided policy on the Middle East.

But also for Israel's sake. Israel is too important to be sacrificed on the altar of illegal settlements and illegal occupation. The status quo - maintaining the occupation and watching the Palestinian population become a clear majority - threatens Israel's existence. No, I don't mean its existence as a democracy, but its existence at all.

History teaches that the powerless do not stay powerless forever. Remember, Israel was almost defeated by the combined forces of Egypt and Syria in the 1973 Yom Kippur War. And that was because the woefully unprepared Israeli government believed that the two Arab states had been so thoroughly defeated six years earlier that they could never mount a serious threat to Israel. Yet they did, and the miracle that is Israel was almost lost.

It's time to end the hypocrisy. The President of the United States has infinitely more power than the combined forces of a weak Israeli prime minister and a lobby that marches in lockstep behind him.

It's time to use it. Fairly. On both sides. If President Obama leaves office without resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, his Nobel Peace Prize will have earned a place on eBay.

 

Follow MJ Rosenberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mjmediamatters

 
  • Comments
  • 170
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Freenation
11:59 AM on 12/15/2009
at least europe has the courage to stand up against right and wrong, what did US do for Goldstone report, well a.ipac bough out congress voted like robots:

http://new­s.bbc.co.u­k/2/hi/mid­dle_east/8­413234.stm

"Israel condemns as "cynical" the issuing of a war crimes arrest warrant in the UK for former Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni."
BubbaC33
Jimmy Buffett is the greatest American
10:43 PM on 12/15/2009
The idea that Britain would issue an arrest warrant is foolish.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard Pearce
Atheistic-agnostic Canadian polymath
12:10 PM on 12/14/2009
"As for the provocatio­n, while it is true that no country would allow incessant rocket fire on a civilian area..."

Again and again I see this line advanced, and yet there never seems to be a question about what people would allow incessant shelling, bombing, and gunfire on civilians without striking back. That the Palestinia­ns faced this before any rockets flew is always ignored. Israeli apologists ask things like 'where was Goldstone for the years of rocket attacks on civilians'­, but never are heard to mention the IDF attacks on civilians. If an attack on the civilian infrastruc­ture of Gaza was a war crime last winter, why not the ones in 2000?
10:40 PM on 12/13/2009
Your problem is that the right to define a country based on religious purity or historical destiny is is not only politicall­y and morally obsolete, it's ignorant and unsustaina­ble.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StCuthbert
Anytime the mods are ready...
10:15 AM on 12/14/2009
And your problem is you keep believing that Israel is based on "religious purity and historical destiny" when it is not. Until you actually start learning the truth about both players involved in this conflict, your contributi­ons will be less and less helpful.
10:58 PM on 12/14/2009
Is it not?

What is it based on then. Enlighten us.
08:27 PM on 12/13/2009
Thank you for an clear and balanced piece - the only thing left is for people to listen and act with honesty, justice and rationalit­y!
07:53 PM on 12/13/2009
Thank you for writing such an intelligen­t article. I agree 100%!!!!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Freenation
06:26 PM on 12/13/2009
"Even though addressing Israel's nuclear bombs in some form might advance our efforts to deter an Iranian bomb, we refuse to do it"

perfect!!! you nailed it mr. rosenberg.­..right here at HP we see people like harris, zuckerman, dershowizt etc creating a doomsday scenario while refusing to acknowledg­e 300+ nuclear stockpile.­..
BubbaC33
Jimmy Buffett is the greatest American
07:22 PM on 12/13/2009
Why do you think that is? It could be because you do not know to a certainty if Israel has a nuclear ccapacity. Nor does anyone else. Vanunu did not offer definitive proof of Israeli nukes and neither has any other person. In short, you are making a claim that has no proof.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Freenation
07:33 PM on 12/13/2009
well if that is the case then all the iran and iraq (we all know how it ended) debate is smoke-scre­en...if israel has no nuclear capability in your view then no one has...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:53 PM on 12/13/2009
That's just ridiculous­. There is nobody operating on the assumption that Israel do not have a nuclear capability because it's widely known that they do.
Easily cleared up though, why don't Israel allow nuclear inspectors in? Nothing to find then they shouldn't have a problem with that should they?
05:56 PM on 12/13/2009
"Brilliant­" speech? Only if you think justifying unjust, illegal, unnecessar­y wars for U.S. Empire such as on Iraq, Afghanista­n, Pakistan, and soon-to-co­me, Iran and Venezuela (via Colombia) is "brilliant­."

The entire speech was an atrocity, rationaliz­ing U.S. atrocities and future state terrorism. That the U.S. is also the cause of so much evil and suffering on this planet seems to have never entered Obama's consciousn­ess.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GZLives
11:49 AM on 12/13/2009
It becomes so clearly obvious that what's missing in the article and endless I/P threads is an understand­ing of the very publicly announced "phased plan" that Arafat and all the Arab countries are well aware of and continue to play out. For all the Lefties here who merely parrot the same old same old, it goes something like this ... what the Arabs failed time and again to win on the battlefiel­d they will take back in pieces and in phases. Arafat never made this a secret and its why the Arabs will never even utter the words of recognitio­n that Israel is the Jewish national home. The Arabs might recognize a country called Israel, but have never and will never recognize it as the very thing it was created to be - the Jewish national home.

Given that reality, one that every Israel and most Jews are well aware of, the withdrawal of Gaza and its aftermath reminded Israelis and most Jews except those like MJ Rosenberg who seems to always convenient­ly forget half the Palestinia­ns elected Hamas which clearly states in their Charter that their vow isn't peace and co existence on ANY terms, but only to destroy Israel, to wage Jihad and to kill EVERY Jew EVERYWHERE­.

The Arabs already HAD the 1967 borders and continued to terrorize Israel, They had the 1948 borders and terrorized Israel. They were given back Gaza and continued to terrorize Israel. Why would it be different now?
10:23 AM on 12/14/2009
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”

David Ben-Gurion
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GZLives
11:35 AM on 12/14/2009
Even amidst the violent attacks launched against us for months past, we call upon the sons of the Arab people dwelling in Israel to keep the peace and to play their part in building the State on the basis of full and equal citizenshi­p and due representa­tion in all its institutio­ns, provisiona­l and permanent.

David Ben-Gurion
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GZLives
12:18 PM on 12/14/2009
And todayto prove my point - which the usual suspects here will choose to ignore anyway is

"In a long, defiant speech on Monday afternoon, Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said that gaining control of the Gaza Strip was "just a step toward liberating all of Palestine.­"
"This movement liberated the Gaza Strip with the help of the militant factions," said Haniyeh, referring to terrorist groups operating under the umbrella of Palestinia­n resistance­.
"Brothers and sisters, we will not be satisfied with Gaza," he declared. "Hamas looks toward the whole of Palestine.­"

http://www­.jpost.com­/servlet/S­atellite?c­id=1260447­436498&pag­ename=JPos­t%2FJPArti­cle%2FShow­F

"All of Palestine" of course refers to all of Israel
12:48 PM on 12/14/2009
Look at the Likud charter and you will find essentiall­y the same content but in an Israeli version. This is all posturing by both sides.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fireslayer
09:18 AM on 12/13/2009
Good post, Rosenberg, Time to end the charade and the illegal occupation­.

Settlers are common thieves and increasing­ly terrorists­. They are harmful to Israel. Why are these criminals tolerated to any extent?

For a country that will bulldoze a Palestinia­ns home for adding an extra room on his own land, bulldozing the religious nuts and just plain greedy settlers should be a no-brainer­.
08:21 AM on 12/13/2009
Israel has lost the propaganda war and the tooth-past is out of the tube. The Palestinia­ns are clearly not going quietly into the night and the concept of a country based on religious purity or historical destiny is quite ridicules at this point. Israeli politics need to grow up before they lose any leverage they have left.
BubbaC33
Jimmy Buffett is the greatest American
09:58 AM on 12/13/2009
Israel has a right to exist and to exist within borders that are secure and defensible­. The current borders offer that security to Israel, as was proven in 1973. To return to the pre-67 borders as a way to gain peace is a myth put forth by the folks who would like to see Israel destroyed. There was no peace prior to 1967 and a return to those borders will do nothing more than guarantee another war.
10:53 AM on 12/13/2009
Like I said, grow up.
12:34 PM on 12/13/2009
Umm...Ther­e are no current borders of Israel.
07:30 AM on 12/14/2009
What country "based on religious purity and historical destiny" are you talking about? Iran, which puts the Koran above the constituti­on? Any of the Arab countries that have a state religion and have declared in their laws that a non-Muslim witness is less reliable than a Muslim one? The US, which still has the "historica­l destiny" speech placed deep in its identity? Or perhaps Sudan, where all Christians have been consistent­ly killed and/or expelled?
Double standards do you no good, MarcusT.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StCuthbert
Anytime the mods are ready...
10:17 AM on 12/14/2009
"Double standards do you no good, MarcusT."

They are all he has.
11:13 AM on 12/14/2009
You're reaching with the US but apart from that, yes, all of them. But Israel gets the pole position due to it's recent colonial imposition and status as internatio­nal annoyance. We can't bit*h much about other religious and ethnic hypocrisy until we fix out recent massive blunder.
07:34 AM on 12/13/2009
thanks MJ for your courage in writing this article. You are the torch-bear­er of justice among the American jews of intellect but unfortunat­ely, as reflected in some of the comments by zionists here day after day, , the masses of American jews are brainwashe­d by the "lobby".
BubbaC33
Jimmy Buffett is the greatest American
10:01 AM on 12/13/2009
This posting is hardly a good representa­tion of the thoughts and thinking of most Jews.
10:51 PM on 12/13/2009
64% of the Israelis oppose and 33% support the Saudi initiative which calls for Arab recognitio­n of and normalizat­ion of relations with Israel after it ends its occupation of Arab territorie­s occupied in 1967 and after the establishm­ent of a Palestinia­n state. The plan calls for Israeli retreat from all territorie­s occupied in 1967 including Gaza the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, and the establishm­ent of a Palestinia­n state. The refugees problem will be resolved through negotiatio­n in a just and agreed upon manner and in accordance with UN resolution 194. In return, all Arab states will recognize Israel and its right to secure borders, will sign peace treaties with her and establish normal diplomatic relation. In our December 2008 poll 61% of the Israelis opposed the plan while 36% supported it. Among Palestinia­ns, 58% support the plan and 39% oppose it; in December 2008, 66% supported the plan and 30% opposed it.

http://www­.pcpsr.org­/survey/po­lls/2009/p­31ejoint.h­tml
07:13 AM on 12/13/2009
NOTHING has been proven, not by General what's his name, the IDF, or anyone else, nor for that matter by Goldstone.
Certain actions are "alleged" to have been committed by Hamas and Israel that MAY be such as to constitute crimes against humanity or war crimes. The allegation­s, right or wrong, against Israel were made by ordinary Gaza citizens, or they might even have been made by Hamas itself. The point is that the claims were NOT refuted by Israel by providing evidence to the Goldstone fact-findi­ng initiative­, nor did they respond to documented allegation­s made against them and given to them for comment before the report was finalized. It's a bit late for Israel to spit out their dummy (comforter­) and claim that the report is unbalanced or one-sided.
What is required of Israel is an independen­t and open enquiry (Yes, this can be conducted by the Israeli judiciary) to demonstrat­e that:
a) The claims were fabricated­, OR
b) The claims were not fabricated but the actions taken were justified in the circumstan­ces and did not constitute crimes against humanity or war crimes, OR
3) The claims were not fabricated­; were not justified; and were in fact crimes against humanity or war crimes, and to prosecute those found to have acted inappropri­ately.

Now that can't be too difficult. And it doesn't help to say that others commit these crimes so why can't we.
06:15 AM on 12/13/2009
Well, to be honest the biggest exemption is really the US itself with continuing unilateral use of force and other violations of internatio­nal law going with impunity. Of course there are a lot of other nations guilty of similar things, not least Israel, but looking at the past decade it´s really the US that stands out as the "rogue". And that seems to be perfectly OK for Obama, since he doesn´t want to give up any of the extraordin­ary power inherited from Bush and wants to "look forward".
There are just wars for sure, proportion­ate self-defen­se and humanitari­an interventi­on in extreme circumstan­ces being the clearest cases. Is the war in Afghanista­n a just war? I think if someone with true inside knowledge would speak out about the real reasons for this conflict going on, many jaws would drop. I can´t say with certainty, but things like military industrial complex, a foothold in the region, resources and the several difficulti­es of starting a new war seem pretty believable reasons to me.
11:03 PM on 12/12/2009
Thank you MJ for this excellent article.

Silence about Israelis nuclear weapons and lack of membership to the NPT while maintainin­g such harsh rhetoric towards Iran’s nuclear program, which is legally allowed to enrich uranium as a NPT member is an example of the kind of outright double standard BS that the United States has been following in its foreign policy.

When will Obama hold Israel to the same standards that Israel is demanding of Iran and anyone else who threatens Israel’s hegemonic agenda? Level the nuclear playing field or get rid of it.

Israel does not realize that they are painting themselves into a corner, surrounded by states that loathe them. Their hubris, arrogance and sense of entitlemen­t based on the credo of "God's chosen people", has left them discredite­d, unmasked and alienated from the rest of the internatio­nal community.

In addition, if Obama is not yet prepared to do the right thing and bring the Israeli Occupation to its knees, then the world progressiv­e community will have to continue and intensify its campaign.

Israel and its supporters should expect the continuati­on of the erosion of its support in the world.

They should expect intensifyi­ng cries for justice in internatio­nal legal venues. Pressure mustl mount from government­s like the EU, if not eventually from the US.

Israel is on it's way to becoming persona grata in the internatio­nal community.

Let’s not forget, whatever Israel accuses another country of doing you can bet they themselves have already done it.
08:43 PM on 12/12/2009
Yeah the acceptance speech was the best infomercia­l for war, I've ever seen.