Archive

Archive for the ‘Obama vs Bibi’ Category

Mind the gaffe but only fools rush in

November 8th, 2011 K. Shoshana 1 comment

Everyone is all a twitter about the alleged open mic moment between US President Obama and France’s Prime Minister Sarkozy. Sarkozy accused Israeli Prime Minister of being a liar and ‘being fed up with him’ reminds me of what passes for appropriate small dinner time chat among France’s diplomatic corps.

While I have no reason to doubt Sarkozy’s animus towards an Israeli Prime Minister, after all there is a French tradition for that kind of thing- what is far more striking is just just what Sarkozy has against the US President. If anything, Sarkozy’s ‘gaffe’ really smells far more like ‘set-up’ to me. Sarkozy actually leads Obama into making ‘personal’ admissions about the Israeli Prime Minister.

The open mic ‘gaffe’ will hurt the Obama Administration far more with Democratic and Republican voters than it will hurt Sarkozy among his natural constituency in France. But this kind of ‘gaffe’ by Obama, when relations among the White House and the US Jewish community are at an all-time low – and in a lead-up to a major US election cycle for the Presidency…well, Sarkozy just handed Obama a shovel to keep digging his political grave..

Categories: Obama vs Bibi, Old Europe Tags:

Chutzpah Borders

May 19th, 2011 K. Shoshana 1 comment

It takes a special kind of chutzpah for a US President to make policy pronouncements on what should be the border of Israel; when he cannot even effective secure the borders of his own country.

x-posted to The Last Amazon, exiled.

shakedown

May 3rd, 2010 K. Shoshana 5 comments

I meant to comment on this piece before Friday and I just ran out of time. Ynet News

Interior Minister Eli Yishai has been officially invited to visit the White House. The decision is apparently the result of the US Administration’s desire to forge closer ties with the minister they perceive to be behind the east Jerusalem construction turmoil during Vice President Joe Biden’s visit in Israel.
 
During Biden’s visit last month, the Interior Ministry approved the construction of 1,800 housing units in east Jerusalem’s Ramat Shlomo neighborhood. The invitation was handed to Yishai by Dan Shapiro, Director of the Middle East department at the National Security Council.

 Shapiro was also the one who reprimanded Yishai following the east Jerusalem construction decision, yet despite the harsh tones, the interior minister was asked to visit Washington at that time already. The official invitation, as noted, was extended Wednesday.

What you have to ask yourself is why would the White House extend a personal invitation to the leader of a small fraction within the Likud coalition? The White House couldn’t pass up another chance to diss Bibi or meddle in the internal affairs of another country? And if the White House was going to invite anyone in the Likud coalition certain Israel Beitneiu holds more mandates but I believe the answer lies in a well known insider joke in Israeli domestic circles which characterizes the Shas party as the most eminently ‘bribe-able’ of political parties. Given that this is Israel – that’s actually quite a feat.

Being the most ‘bribe-able’ party in Israeli is all very well and good except the Obama Administration possesses no coinage of value to pay Shas. It cannot guarantee increased housing for their members, increased funding for their members in the educational system or any increase welfare payments to Yeshivas and their students.

Now the Obama Administration might feel all hard-core having been baptized by the Chicago political process but the truth is; attempting to shake down the guys who invented the political shakedown and have been practicing it in a tradition older than the city of Chicago exposes a most alarming nativity.

I suppose the Obama Administration felt a personal invitation showed their ‘nuance’ and allowed them to exercise a certain ‘Machiavellian’ quality to their diplo-speak which might have worked if the Obama Administration had invited Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the real spiritual leader of Shas rather than Eli Yishai. Now that would have been Machiavellian, and besides, Yishai will not and cannot agree to anything without checking with his Rav first.

Of course, there is always the chance that the White House felt a personal invitation would allow the President the opportunity to dress down the Yishai and put the fear of an American G-d into him… and good luck with that! This is probably why Lieberman probably didn’t get an invite since Lieberman would probably bite back and the Obama administration couldn’t risk for the POTUS to lose his ear.

Categories: Obama vs Bibi Tags:

Really bad form

April 27th, 2010 K. Shoshana 6 comments

US President Obama is reaching out to Muslims again. Ynet News:

President Barack Obama on Monday renewed his commitment to a “new beginning” with the Muslim world, vowing no let-up in US efforts to promote Middle East peace, curb militant violence and boost economic development. Seeking to build on his outreach to Muslims in a speech in Cairo last June, Obama used a US-hosted Muslim business conference to underscore what his administration has done so far and to pledge further work to overcome mistrust. While Obama has made progress toward mending America’s image in the Islamic world, he still faces stiff challenges in his handling of the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process, the nuclear standoff with Iran and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“I knew that this vision would not be fulfilled in a single year, or even several. But I knew we had to begin and that all of us have responsibilities to fulfill,” Obama told the Presidential Summit on Entrepreneurship…..”There’s so much more we can do together, in partnership, to foster opportunity and prosperity in all our countries,” Obama said as he sought to focus more on talking about doing business together.

Like tell anti-Jew jokes. Ynet News:

VIDEO – National Security Adviser James Jones opened his remarks at the 25-year anniversary gala of the Washington Institute For Near East Policy last weekend with a joke in which a Jewish merchant fleeces a thirsty Taliban fighter. CBS reported that the joke, which many claimed was in bad taste, was conspicuously absent from the version of the remarks distributed to the media.

Here is how it went: “A Taliban militant gets lost and is wandering around the desert looking for water. He finally arrives at a store run by a Jew and asks for water. The Jewish vendor tells him he doesn’t have any water but can gladly sell him a tie. The Taliban begins to curse and yell at the Jewish storeowner. The Jew, unmoved, offers the rude militant an idea: Beyond the hill, there is a restaurant; they can sell you water. The Taliban keeps cursing and finally leaves toward the hill. An hour later he’s back at the tie store. He walks in and tells the merchant: “Your brother tells me I need a tie to get into the restaurant.”
Foreign Policy reported that the participants, many of whom were Jewish, laughed heartily, but conservative blogs and some Jewish community leaders pounced on the remark.

How Foreign Policy knew the ‘Jewish’ participants laughed is beyond me but maybe they polled the room after and as far as ‘conservative blogs and ’some’ Jewish community leaders pouncing on the remark replace ‘Jew’ with ‘Muslim’ and see if you understand the offence and perhaps spark a riot and a near-death experience for ’some’.Foreign Policy reported that the participants, many of whom were Jewish, laughed heartily, but conservative blogs and some Jewish community leaders pounced on the remark. Ethnic jokes are always a massive fail in the public political arena unless your poking yourself.

If the Democratic plan is to diverst themselves from Jewish Americans and their contribution to the political process on side of the Democrats; I’d say the plan was one of the few policies of the Obama Administration which is performing well.

J-Street, the Obama Administration’s pet nominal ‘Jewish’ advocacy group has decided to go on the attack and publish ads in various “Jewish” journals criticizing Elie Wiesel for speaking out against the Obama Administration’s tempter tantrum against Jerusalem. Again, I have to issue a massive F for the public relations failure on three levels.

J-Street published ads in ‘Jewish’ journals while Wiesel made his case in the Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the International Herald Tribune and he pitched his plea not just to a Jewish audience but the wider public. Secondly, publicly criticizing Wiesel for exercising his free speech rights and opinion on the significance of Jerusalem for Jews is the equivalent of beating up a holocaust survivor in a elevator for being a Jew. Thirdly, using hard leftist Yossi Sarid, the disposed head of Meretz (who doesn’t even live in Jerusalem) as your counterweight to the credibility of Elie Wiesel is like using the Pope as your posterboy for the anti-MAMBLA campaign.

You can do it but its just really bad form.

Categories: Jerusalem, Obama vs Bibi Tags:

A real friend wouldn’t ask you to betray your country or your people.

April 21st, 2010 K. Shoshana No comments

Earlier in the week I had read Martin Indyk’s column in the NY Times but I really hadn’t cared enough to comment until Ynet News put a summary in their paper.

WASHINGTON – “Netanyahu must make a choice,” former US Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk said in an article published in the New York Times titled: “When your best friend gets angry.”
 Indyk, who is considered close to the Obama administration, wrote that the Israeli prime minister must choose between facing off with the president of the United States or facing off with his right-wing coalition partners.
“The shift in America’s Middle East interests means that Netanyahu must make a choice: Take on the president of the United States, or take on his right wing. If he continues to defer to those ministers in his cabinet who oppose peacemaking, the consequences for US-Israel relations could be dire.”

I agree with Indyk that Netanyahu has a choice and he has framed the choice reasonably per say except what he fully does not appreciate is the full implications of who Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition partners represent. Israelis vote on a mandate system of proportionate representation which means a good 65-69% of the Israeli public is now effectively represented in Netanyahu’s government and the choice the Americans are asking is; choose us over the very people and country you represent. This might work in some third world totalitarian country but this is Israel – a democracy. Furthermore, contrary to the view many of the Obamni try to spin, Netanyahu’s coalition is one of the stablest Israel has seen for some time.

This continued approach of the Obama Administration in demanding Netanyahu publicly answer their ultimatum weeks after it was issued is rather embarrassing as sometimes, even a ‘no’ answer, is an answer. Like most Israelis, I may not hold a high opinion of Netanyahu’s character but if the choice is to betray your country and the Jewish people for American patronage; Netanyahu is enough of an Israeli patriot to chose Israel, the eternal nation. Netanyahu is many things, both good and bad; but an Olmert he is not.

Are there any grown-ups left in the Obama Administration?

April 21st, 2010 K. Shoshana No comments

If I needed any proof that the Obamni lacked any wisdom or political finesse, this has removed any doubts. Ha’aretz

United States administration officials have voiced harsh criticism over advertisements in favor of Israel’s position on Jerusalem that appeared in the U.S. press with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s encouragement. The authors of the most recent such advertisements were president of the World Jewish Congress Ronald Lauder and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Elie Wiesel. “All these advertisements are not a wise move,” one senior American official told Haaretz.

In the advertisement, Wiesel said that for him as a Jew, “Jerusalem is above politics,” and that “it is mentioned more than 600 times in Scripture – and not a single time in the Koran.” Wiesel called to postpone discussion on Jerusalem until a later date, when there is an atmosphere of security allowing Israeli and Palestinian communities to find ways to live in peace.

Slamming Elie Wiesel’s for exercising his right of free speech and free expression within the United States for saying and underscoring the unique relationship Jerusalem plays within Judaism is public of equivalent of attempting to beat up a former holocaust survivor in a elevator for being a Jew.

The wise, the prudent, the diplomatic and only grown-up response would be to say nothing, or if cornered into a response – suggest something along the lines of ‘this is American and anyone is allowed their right to exercise their opinion and isn’t free speech grand?’

Categories: Obama vs Bibi Tags:

Obama vs Bibi

May 20th, 2009 K. Shoshana No comments

I woke up dead-tired – again. I really don’t get what it is about these long weekends but they do wear me out something fierce – much more than the regular variety. Then there really wasn’t much news which interested me enough to blog yesterday – hence the blankness – and I make no promises about today.

Most of the newspapers this weekend were running opinion pieces on the Israeli Prime Minister’s first trip to the Obama White House. The anti-Israeli fractions were gleefully predicting person non grata status for Bibi Netanyahu and/or he would finally get his comeuppance as Obama would hand Bibi his butt. The pro-Israel sides all seemed worried over Bibi and fretted endlessly that Bibi would cave into American delusions rather than stand strong and resolute.

From the sounds of it, an hour meeting went on long after its Best Before Date expired which leads me to believe, and judging from Bibi’s statements to the press afterwards – it went better than anyone could possibly hope for it -Bibi held his ground and Obama got nothing but gets does get to keep his own parts workable.

Anyway, I read this NY Times piece on the meeting and this sentence really seem best suited to summing up the process for me.

In a sense, Monday’s meeting in the Oval Office was as much about the two leaders’ efforts to develop a relationship as it was about the substance of the issues between the nations. Mr. Miller, the former Middle East negotiator, characterized the session as “President ‘Yes We Can’ sitting down with Prime Minister ‘No You Won’t.’ ”


Believe it or not, I figure Bibi more or less has prevailed as there is nothing Obama has done in his 100 plus days which doesn’t scream foreign policy pussy.

Categories: Obama vs Bibi Tags: