Tuesday, January 25th, 2011
6

"As for Americans, we learn, as if we didn't know, that due to the pressure of AIPAC, we simply lie about the whole conflict. We pretend that the Palestinians still need to make concessions for peace when there are none left to make. No matter what the provocation – the brutal attack on the Gaza flotilla, the blockading of Gaza, Israel's lies about the Goldstone Report, the land grabs in Jerusalem, the shootings of innocent Palestinians, the monstrous behaviour of settlers – we are silent unless we can enthusiastically endorse Israel's position. We are not an honest broker. We are no broker at all. Worst of all, we know (the Al Jazeera papers confirm this) that we are endorsing Israeli positions that we know not to be true. Why do we do it? The same reason we don't ban assault weapons. A lobby (only in this case, the lobby of a foreign government) is dictating our policies with no regard for the greater American good. So what's next? One, the US must now absolutely refuse to veto the UN resolution condemning settlements or demonstrate to the world that, despite the Al Jazeera revelations, we are still utterly in Israel's pocket (I won't hold my breath)."
Media Matters Action Network senior foreign policy fellow MJ Rosenberg gives his take on Al Jazeera's Wikileaks-like release of "The Palestine Papers," a cache of over 1,600 internal documents from the past ten years of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

6 Comments / Post A Comment

Lockheed Ventura (#5,536)

How twisted is it that honest analysis of US foreign policy is only available on Al-Jazeera? Still I think AIPAC while influential, actually reflects the views of the majority of the American people. Americans either support Israel or they don't really care about the issue.

barnhouse (#1,326)

Couldn't disagree more. AIPAC has gotten a little too far under the covers with the Republican right for that to be so. However, Al Jazeera (a really great newspaper, by the bye) is a partisan source, too, in its way. This is a cui bono story; who benefits most from seeing the (admittedly, worse than useless) Palestinian Authority taken down? (Well, Hamas springs to mind.)

Tuce (#427)

Who benefits from the exposure of unelected, self-appointed "negotiators" conceding almost every possible Palestinian right under international law (and, also, just being horrible negotiators)? The Palestinian people benefit, I would think.

barnhouse (#1,326)

That would be nice, though informed observers said yesterday that the publication of these documents has made matters worse. (One guy on NPR said that everyone will see in this what he wishes to see, and that might be the truest words spoken yet.) In any case, not many will be surprised if these revelations turn out to have been orchestrated by those who stand to benefit.

Dave Bry (#422)

Those are sadly true words. Yesterday Avigdor Leiberman already said that the publication of the papers proved that the only way forward was his proposed "interim plan," which basically calls for a freeze of the situation's conditions as they stand. Which, you know, those conditions are not so good for Palestinians.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-leaked-palestinian-papers-prove-interim-deal-is-only-option-1.338872

josiah (#1,719)

It seems to me that AIPAC is largely incidental to U.S. support for Israel. Israel is simply a useful U.S. ally in its region. No one tries to explain U.S. support for Indonesia or media silence about the Jakarta government's atrocities as being the result of some powerful Indonesian lobby.

Post a Comment