US-Israeli Relations After the Election

[Indy Texas]

Israel $3.1B
Afghanistan $1.59B
Egypt $1.51B
Pakistan $880M
Nigeria $720M
Jordan $670M

Countries that do as we tell them and deserve their allowance:
Egypt
Nigeria
Jordan

Countries that disobey us and don't deserve their allowance:
Israel
Afghanistan
Pakistan

[ag]

So, these are the editorial and op-ed pages of the NYTimes from the last couple days. This does reflect SOME thinking (and on the Middle east I would take Friedman a lot more seriously than on the shape of the planet in general):

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/19/opinion/thomas-friedman-bibi-will-make-history.html?ref=opinion
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/opinion/go-ahead-ruin-my-day.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fthomas-l-friedman&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&module=Collection&region=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/19/opinion/abetting-egypts-dictatorship.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/opinion/an-israeli-election-turns-ugly.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/19/opinion/netanyahus-win-is-good-for-palestine.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[ag]

Israel $3.1B
Afghanistan $1.59B
Egypt $1.51B
Pakistan $880M
Nigeria $720M
Jordan $670M

Countries that do as we tell them and deserve their allowance:
Egypt
Nigeria
Jordan

Egypt should have been cut off long ago. It is a horrid dictatorship.

[Indy Texas]

Israel $3.1B
Afghanistan $1.59B
Egypt $1.51B
Pakistan $880M
Nigeria $720M
Jordan $670M

Countries that do as we tell them and deserve their allowance:
Egypt
Nigeria
Jordan

Egypt should have been cut off long ago. It is a horrid dictatorship.

But it's a dictatorship that does things we want/need them to do. It's only when they outlive their usefulness that they become a problem. Example: 1980s Saddam Hussein versus 2003 Saddam Hussein

[ag]

Israel $3.1B
Afghanistan $1.59B
Egypt $1.51B
Pakistan $880M
Nigeria $720M
Jordan $670M

Countries that do as we tell them and deserve their allowance:
Egypt
Nigeria
Jordan

Egypt should have been cut off long ago. It is a horrid dictatorship.

But it's a dictatorship that does things we want/need them to do. It's only when they outlive their usefulness that they become a problem. Example: 1980s Saddam Hussein versus 2003 Saddam Hussein

They do not. They are, actually, a problem.

[Sumner 1868]

Israel $3.1B
Afghanistan $1.59B
Egypt $1.51B
Pakistan $880M
Nigeria $720M
Jordan $670M

Countries that do as we tell them and deserve their allowance:
Egypt
Nigeria
Jordan

Egypt should have been cut off long ago. It is a horrid dictatorship.

They should all be cut off, with temporary exceptions for humanitarian crises.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Israel $3.1B
Afghanistan $1.59B
Egypt $1.51B
Pakistan $880M
Nigeria $720M
Jordan $670M

Countries that do as we tell them and deserve their allowance:
Egypt
Nigeria
Jordan

Not exactly a stellar list there.
Egypt has a 6,5 freedom house rating, and is mass executing political opponents
Nigeria has a 4,5 freedom house rating
Jordan has a 6,5 freedom house rating.

[bedstuy]

Also, finding it really funny to see liberals and progressives sitting around discussing what the appropriate punishment is for a sovereign state refusing to oust its leader on the order of the US President.

A foreign government openly trying to push out a country's leader causes a backlash of nationalism. Water is wet.

What are you talking about?  What did Obama do that was out of line?  If Netanyahu doesn't like what Obama is doing he should cut Israeli military aid to the US.  Oh wait, we send Israel military aid, so maybe respect is due.

Netanyahu has tried to strong-arm President Obama and flagrantly insulted him with that speech.  And, don't forget, Netanyahu basically endorsed Romney and openly disrespects Obama.  He acts like Israel defends the US, not the other way around.  We are the superpower and we provide for Israel's defense.

Israel is acting like a trust fund kid that gets angry when their parent buys them a BMW in charcoal gray instead of black.  What exactly has Obama done to hurt Israel?  Nothing.  Obama is pro-Israel and has held to the same position on Israel as previous Presidents.  Certainly, Obama is more pro-Israel than George H.W. Bush or Bill Clinton.

Do I think Obama should punish Israel because Netanyahu is surly, right-wing egomaniac?  No.  The fundamentals of our relationship with Israel go beyond personality politics.  And, Obama is a bigger man than Bibi.  But, no US President has ever tolerated this kind of disrespect from what is essentially a country on the US trust-fund and no President has ever made our policy unconditional support for settlements in the West Bank. 

[Antonio the Sixth]

Nothing will change.

[Hnv1]

Dear Obama:
Cut military aid
Let the UNSC pass a resolution stating a 2 state solution on the 67 border with minor land swapping must reached within 2-4 years
Make US capital investment in settlement banned
Tell AIPAC to p*ss off

Thank you. Ohh, and sack Kerry so he wouldn't deal with BB anymore, he has shown he has the spine of a jellyfish

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Also, finding it really funny to see liberals and progressives sitting around discussing what the appropriate punishment is for a sovereign state refusing to oust its leader on the order of the US President.

A foreign government openly trying to push out a country's leader causes a backlash of nationalism. Water is wet.

So you don't think the United States should evaluate its relationship with a given country based on  how that country's government behaves toward the United States?

Elections have consequences. Your apologism for Netanyahu is yet more proof that you need to get rid of your New Jersey avatar because you clearly care more about Israel than you do about the United States.

Do you accuse all Israel-supporters of having dual loyalty, or just the Jews? In case you didn't notice, the majority of its supporters are Christians - and Israel has a far higher approval rating with the country than this President.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Also, finding it really funny to see liberals and progressives sitting around discussing what the appropriate punishment is for a sovereign state refusing to oust its leader on the order of the US President.

A foreign government openly trying to push out a country's leader causes a backlash of nationalism. Water is wet.

What are you talking about?  What did Obama do that was out of line?  If Netanyahu doesn't like what Obama is doing he should cut Israeli military aid to the US.  Oh wait, we send Israel military aid, so maybe respect is due.

Netanyahu has tried to strong-arm President Obama and flagrantly insulted him with that speech.  And, don't forget, Netanyahu basically endorsed Romney and openly disrespects Obama.  He acts like Israel defends the US, not the other way around.  We are the superpower and we provide for Israel's defense.

Israel is acting like a trust fund kid that gets angry when their parent buys them a BMW in charcoal gray instead of black.  What exactly has Obama done to hurt Israel?  Nothing.  Obama is pro-Israel and has held to the same position on Israel as previous Presidents.  Certainly, Obama is more pro-Israel than George H.W. Bush or Bill Clinton.

Do I think Obama should punish Israel because Netanyahu is surly, right-wing egomaniac?  No.  The fundamentals of our relationship with Israel go beyond personality politics.  And, Obama is a bigger man than Bibi.  But, no US President has ever tolerated this kind of disrespect from what is essentially a country on the US trust-fund and no President has ever made our policy unconditional support for settlements in the West Bank. 

They both took their shots at each other. They both missed. Fair play on that front, although Obama went further than simple tacit backing - he aided Herzog through a PAC.

But the election is over now, and if Obama starts to rachet up pressure on Israel solely as a result of their election results, it starts to look a lot like he's actually punishing a US ally for not going along with his orders on their vote. That's not the action of any sort of ally.

Now, Obama hasn't actually taken any sort of punitive action yet, and most of this is just Fox News scaremongering. However, if he does, that's a completely different matter and I expect to see the Democrats step up to keep this President from using his lame duck period to permanently destroy US foreign relations with an ally.

As to your last point, no, no President has ever backed West Bank settlements - but no President declared Jewish areas of eastern Jerusalem to be settlements either, especially since they're likely to remain with Israel in a land swap. That's really where all this tension began, with Obama picking  a fight he thought he could win at the start of his term and losing handily. Both sides have been escalating the tension since, but at this point it's a battle of personalities between two temporary leaders. The things discussed in this thread would cause permanent consequences long after they're gone.

[traininthedistance]

Also, finding it really funny to see liberals and progressives sitting around discussing what the appropriate punishment is for a sovereign state refusing to oust its leader on the order of the US President.

A foreign government openly trying to push out a country's leader causes a backlash of nationalism. Water is wet.

What are you talking about?  What did Obama do that was out of line?  If Netanyahu doesn't like what Obama is doing he should cut Israeli military aid to the US.  Oh wait, we send Israel military aid, so maybe respect is due.

Netanyahu has tried to strong-arm President Obama and flagrantly insulted him with that speech.  And, don't forget, Netanyahu basically endorsed Romney and openly disrespects Obama.  He acts like Israel defends the US, not the other way around.  We are the superpower and we provide for Israel's defense.

Israel is acting like a trust fund kid that gets angry when their parent buys them a BMW in charcoal gray instead of black.  What exactly has Obama done to hurt Israel?  Nothing.  Obama is pro-Israel and has held to the same position on Israel as previous Presidents.  Certainly, Obama is more pro-Israel than George H.W. Bush or Bill Clinton.

Do I think Obama should punish Israel because Netanyahu is surly, right-wing egomaniac?  No.  The fundamentals of our relationship with Israel go beyond personality politics.  And, Obama is a bigger man than Bibi.  But, no US President has ever tolerated this kind of disrespect from what is essentially a country on the US trust-fund and no President has ever made our policy unconditional support for settlements in the West Bank. 

To say nothing of Bibi's strategy of explicitly stoking fear and racial hatred to drive up his poll numbers, with the whole "vote for me because those ARABS are going out to the polls!" push.  That, far more than his petty disrespect of Obama, is the serious betrayal of trust and democratic principles here.

[Velasco]

In some ways this is the end of a masquerade. Forced by the political tide, Bibi left hypocrisy and put the cards on the table: there will be no Palestinian state under his tenure. That resounding promise to a radicalised electorate, confident because of the Israeli military superiority and the unconditional US support, makes every statement by US and EU officials on the two-state solution sound ridiculous. In any case, there are no indications that something is going to change. Both USA and Europe will find more comfortable lowering their heads. Replacing useless negotiation and occasional admonitions by pressure, which is the only way to deal with the Israeli administration, is something that won't happen. A sample of that is the reaction of the EU authorities. Federica Mogherini tweeted: "I congratulate Netanyahu for his victory in Israel and look forward to work together with the new government". See, "working together" on a fictional solution which Bibi explicitly rejects. It's sad and regrettable, but the crimes of the Bibi administration will continue unpunished. It's depressing, but as someone wrote in Haaretz, Bibi is what Israel deserves and Bibi deserves to govern Israel. Also, Bibi is what deserves the so called international community.

[Silent Hunter]

Would removing the military aid do that much? Israel could crush the Palestinians even without it.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Would removing the military aid do that much? Israel could crush the Palestinians even without it.

The military aid isn't the most important thing. It's the diplomatic shield from the strongly anti-Israel UN and EU. Israel would likely find itself backed up against a corner by hostile powers looking to legislate it out of existence without the US' support.

[ag]

Would removing the military aid do that much? Israel could crush the Palestinians even without it.

The military aid isn't the most important thing. It's the diplomatic shield from the strongly anti-Israel UN and EU. Israel would likely find itself backed up against a corner by hostile powers looking to legislate it out of existence without the US' support.

Nobody can "legislate" Israel out of existence, except, of course, for Israel itself. UN is not a "world legislature", nor does it pretend to be. And if a self-acknowledged Apartheid state does not receive much international support, it has only itself to blame.

[ag]

Would removing the military aid do that much? Israel could crush the Palestinians even without it.

It will not. Removing aid to Egypt would have a bigger impact - also on Israel.

[Beet]

Would removing the military aid do that much? Israel could crush the Palestinians even without it.

It will not. Removing aid to Egypt would have a bigger impact - also on Israel.

I'm sure someone out there would enjoy seeing the Egyptians get spanked again. Maybe this time the IDF won't stop at the Suez.

Anyway, the point if removing military aid to Israel isn't about Israel but rather something much simpler: It saves the U.S. some money.

[Silent Hunter]

Israel would likely find itself backed up against a corner by hostile powers looking to legislate it out of existence without the US' support.

South Africa spent over a decade in the same place, so don't expect overnight results.

[politicus]

Israel would likely find itself backed up against a corner by hostile powers looking to legislate it out of existence without the US' support.

South Africa spent over a decade in the same place, so don't expect overnight results.

Jews are a majority in Israel, they have a stronger position since the democracy argument is less powerful. Israel also does not have racism enshrined in their constitution despite all the apartheid hyperbole. If the   existence of Israel was really threatened I would still expect most Western governments to back it.

[ag]

Israel would likely find itself backed up against a corner by hostile powers looking to legislate it out of existence without the US' support.

South Africa spent over a decade in the same place, so don't expect overnight results.

Jews are a majority in Israel, they have a stronger position since the democracy argument is less powerful. Israel also does not have racism enshrined in their constitution despite all the apartheid hyperbole. If the   existence of Israel was really threatened I would still expect most Western governments to back it.

The problem is not Israel. The problem is Israel + territories. If there is no two-state solution, there has to be a one-state solution. And one-state solution means Jewish majority that is, at best, tenuous.

[ag]

Would removing the military aid do that much? Israel could crush the Palestinians even without it.

It will not. Removing aid to Egypt would have a bigger impact - also on Israel.

I'm sure someone out there would enjoy seeing the Egyptians get spanked again. Maybe this time the IDF won't stop at the Suez.

Anyway, the point if removing military aid to Israel isn't about Israel but rather something much simpler: It saves the U.S. some money.

Negligible savings. Should be used up in Ukraine, anyway

[politicus]

Israel would likely find itself backed up against a corner by hostile powers looking to legislate it out of existence without the US' support.

South Africa spent over a decade in the same place, so don't expect overnight results.

Jews are a majority in Israel, they have a stronger position since the democracy argument is less powerful. Israel also does not have racism enshrined in their constitution despite all the apartheid hyperbole. If the   existence of Israel was really threatened I would still expect most Western governments to back it.

The problem is not Israel. The problem is Israel + territories. If there is no two-state solution, there has to be a one-state solution. And one-state solution means Jewish majority that is, at best, tenuous.

Still a far cry from South Africa where Whites never made up more than 22% in the first place.

[Velasco]

Jews are a majority in Israel, they have a stronger position since the democracy argument is less powerful. Israel also does not have racism enshrined in their constitution despite all the apartheid hyperbole. If the   existence of Israel was really threatened I would still expect most Western governments to back it.

The "Apartheid hyperbole" is used to describe a real situation of discrimination existing in the Israeli state (affecting to a greater extent Arab Israeli minority, but not only), as well as the open-air prison regime which suffers the population in the Occupied Territories. While I think that it's not correct to qualify the crimes of the Israeli state in the OT as "racist", they are still crimes based on discrimination and the territorial segregation in the West Bank and the isolated Gaza resembles that of Apartheid South Africa. Also, the Israeli society inside the legal borders may not be racist, but for sure there exists a high dose of classism, even among Jews. Furthermore, the quality of a democracy can be measured by the respect for minorities. In that regard, Israel has a huge democratic deficit.