Sometimes there are deeper currents that unite seemingly disparate events. OTOH sometimes history is just one damn thing after another. This one is a bit of both.
I appreciate your valiant effort finding a deeper geo-political explanation, but it isn't ringing true for me. Oil and 9/11 sure, but love for Israel is the enduring reason we remain so invested. America has almost half of world Jewry, so much of the best of 20th century was created by American Jews. Israel captured our hearts, especially in light of the Holocaust. Stories, movies, (looking across the aisle) the Book of Revelation. Sure, AIPAC plays a role, but the real oomph is cultural. (I'm a gentile, BTW)
Growing up Nazis defined evil, the holocaust was central to my moral understanding. Israel represented hope after horror. I followed Oslo and all the negotiations because Israel personally mattered to me. It struck me as normal and natural that we tried so hard for so long to broker a deal leading to a two-state solution. Sarah Longwell and Tim Miller (gentiles both) on a podcast just yesterday talked about a hole in their heart when they think of Israel. They cared. A lot. They held on until it was no longer possible. It is love and heartbreak.
The Leon Uris / Exodus myth is broken and cannot be resuscitated. Again and again Netanyahu gives the middle finger to the Democratic Party, which finally must come to terms with a new reality. The Kamala Harris duck did not and will not work. Chuck Schumer is superannuated. Re-imagining our relationship with Israel is a deep problem, it threatens schism at a time when we must unite.
This analysis makes a ton of sense. And it’s bracingly depressing.
But to make the whole situation seem a bit less sisyphean, if one squints a bit isn’t it possible to make out a vision of how the Middle East could actually become stable (and perhaps eventually prosperous). Couldn’t the combination of a two state solution in the West Bank and Gaza and a non-expansionist Iranian government give the region a real shot at stability? With the Saudis and other GCC members now less focused on funding Islamism than on better relations with the West, are there other big barriers out there if the Palestinian issue was addressed and Iran returned to being a normal country?
I get the argument that this is just the same thinking that helps drag us back in, but I’m less convinced that the past is always doomed to repeat itself. Given our current President, I’m under no illusions that such an outcome is even what they are trying to accomplish. But perhaps with better leadership?
Thanks -- I'm afraid your happier vision feels a lot like assuming a can opener to me. Solving the Palestinian question and transforming the Iranian government are not small asks!
Although I continue to believe that the way to move forward on the Palestinian question is actually obvious and uncomplicated: the U.S. forcing Israel (through the cutoff of aid and, if necessary sanctions) to withdraw all settlers on the west side of the eventual border (say the Olmert/Al-Kidwas line) while the military occupation still remains to prevent a repeat of Gaza (eventually with an international force eventually replacing the IDF). The fundamentalists on both sides will be unhappy with this outcome, but ordinary Palestinians and Israelis will be able to get on with their lives without the abomination that is the settler behavior on the West Bank and without the Palestinians having to publicly "admit" that they are giving up on the right of return or control over Jerusalem; it just becomes a fait accompli that all sides will eventually accept.
The Iranian question, however, I admit may be beyond American power to influence. On the one hand, from what I understand (both from conversations with Iranians in the U.S. and from what I have read) about the essentially secular disposition of most Iranians and the general hatred/exhaustion with the Mullah ruling class, one would think it would be possible for the current regime to be toppled. But not withstanding these tweets
Sometimes there are deeper currents that unite seemingly disparate events. OTOH sometimes history is just one damn thing after another. This one is a bit of both.
I appreciate your valiant effort finding a deeper geo-political explanation, but it isn't ringing true for me. Oil and 9/11 sure, but love for Israel is the enduring reason we remain so invested. America has almost half of world Jewry, so much of the best of 20th century was created by American Jews. Israel captured our hearts, especially in light of the Holocaust. Stories, movies, (looking across the aisle) the Book of Revelation. Sure, AIPAC plays a role, but the real oomph is cultural. (I'm a gentile, BTW)
Growing up Nazis defined evil, the holocaust was central to my moral understanding. Israel represented hope after horror. I followed Oslo and all the negotiations because Israel personally mattered to me. It struck me as normal and natural that we tried so hard for so long to broker a deal leading to a two-state solution. Sarah Longwell and Tim Miller (gentiles both) on a podcast just yesterday talked about a hole in their heart when they think of Israel. They cared. A lot. They held on until it was no longer possible. It is love and heartbreak.
The Leon Uris / Exodus myth is broken and cannot be resuscitated. Again and again Netanyahu gives the middle finger to the Democratic Party, which finally must come to terms with a new reality. The Kamala Harris duck did not and will not work. Chuck Schumer is superannuated. Re-imagining our relationship with Israel is a deep problem, it threatens schism at a time when we must unite.
https://newrepublic.com/article/207310/democrats-new-israel-policy-pritzker-newsom
is good. It proposes that perhaps only a Jewish candidate can lead the Party to the other side (he likes Pritzker). Maybe he is right.
This analysis makes a ton of sense. And it’s bracingly depressing.
But to make the whole situation seem a bit less sisyphean, if one squints a bit isn’t it possible to make out a vision of how the Middle East could actually become stable (and perhaps eventually prosperous). Couldn’t the combination of a two state solution in the West Bank and Gaza and a non-expansionist Iranian government give the region a real shot at stability? With the Saudis and other GCC members now less focused on funding Islamism than on better relations with the West, are there other big barriers out there if the Palestinian issue was addressed and Iran returned to being a normal country?
I get the argument that this is just the same thinking that helps drag us back in, but I’m less convinced that the past is always doomed to repeat itself. Given our current President, I’m under no illusions that such an outcome is even what they are trying to accomplish. But perhaps with better leadership?
Thanks -- I'm afraid your happier vision feels a lot like assuming a can opener to me. Solving the Palestinian question and transforming the Iranian government are not small asks!
Heh. That's fair.
Although I continue to believe that the way to move forward on the Palestinian question is actually obvious and uncomplicated: the U.S. forcing Israel (through the cutoff of aid and, if necessary sanctions) to withdraw all settlers on the west side of the eventual border (say the Olmert/Al-Kidwas line) while the military occupation still remains to prevent a repeat of Gaza (eventually with an international force eventually replacing the IDF). The fundamentalists on both sides will be unhappy with this outcome, but ordinary Palestinians and Israelis will be able to get on with their lives without the abomination that is the settler behavior on the West Bank and without the Palestinians having to publicly "admit" that they are giving up on the right of return or control over Jerusalem; it just becomes a fait accompli that all sides will eventually accept.
The Iranian question, however, I admit may be beyond American power to influence. On the one hand, from what I understand (both from conversations with Iranians in the U.S. and from what I have read) about the essentially secular disposition of most Iranians and the general hatred/exhaustion with the Mullah ruling class, one would think it would be possible for the current regime to be toppled. But not withstanding these tweets
https://x.com/IsraeliPM/status/2031452019861459240 and all the past protests within Iran from 2009 through January, it certainly doesn't seem to be happening.
What amazes me, given the apparent strength of the regime, is how brave (or perhaps foolhardy) the protesters in Iran have been.