American politics
Lexington's notebook
Lessons from the Arab revolt
Libya and the higher bilge (2)
Mar 4th 2011, 19:58 by Lexington
I'VE already vented about the way some Western pundits on the left use the present Arab revolt as a club with which to bash Western nefariousness of one sort or another. It is only fair to add that the left does not have a monopoly on jumping to odd conclusions. A spate of articles in the American media now say that the Arab uprisings show that those who argued for a peace deal in Palestine were barking up the wrong tree. Here, just by way of unsurprising example, is Marty Peretz in the New Republic:
Israel was supposed to be the combustible element on which the entire region teetered. It now turns out that Israel actually had not the slightest allusive presence among the protestants of Tahrir Square. Nor in the successor outposts of the other rebellions. Some of us intuited this all along. Whatever popular conflict there was with the regimes—the kind of conflict that could and would actually undermine and overthrow them—it was not over Israel, because almost all of the regimes had no contact with Israel and hewed closely to the generalized Arab line against it, that even Mubarak and his regime also embraced. There was plenty of raw anti-Semitic claptrap coming from Egyptian official media, much of it comparable to Der Sturmer.
I don't get this. Is the Peretz inference that because the other Arabs want self-determination for themselves they can't want it for the Palestinians too? If he thinks Arabs don't care about Palestine he needs to get out more. As to whether Israel is a combustible element in the region, I offer this list of dates: 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, 2006, 2009. I don't blame Israel for all these wars - far from it. But when Peretz asks, as he does, "So what?" if there's no peace agreement, I invite him to try saying that to the widows.
By the way, he also adds, en passant, that the Arab League's Amr Moussa has been The Economist's favourite for more than a decade "probably because he can be trusted to hate Israel". Rot. For the record, here's a little something I wrote about Amr Moussa, Palestine and Arab democracy.
About Lexington's notebook
In this blog, our Lexington columnist enters America’s political fray and shares the many opinions that don't make it into his column each week.
Advertisement
Economist blogs
- Americas view
- Asia view
- Babbage
- Bagehot's notebook
- Banyan
- Baobab
- Blighty
- Buttonwood's notebook
- Charlemagne's notebook
- Clausewitz
- Daily chart
- Democracy in America
- Eastern approaches
- Free exchange
- Global Leadership
- Gulliver
- Johnson
- Leviathan
- Lexington's notebook
- Multimedia
- Newsbook
- Prospero
- Schumpeter's notebook
- The World in 2011: Cassandra
Most commented
- Charlemagne: No time for doubters
- Turkey and Europe: Mr Erdoğan goes to Germany
- China's foreign policy: Setting sail for Libya
- Insurance and rights: Can same-sex bathrooms be far behind?
- China's pre-emptive crackdown: The people doth not protest
- America’s security commitment to Taiwan: From keystone to millstone?
- Libya: The limpet's legions
- Macedonia's ethnic disharmony: How many building booms can one city take?
- Oil and the economy: The 2011 oil shock
- Banyan: Taiwan's commonsense consensus
Over the past five days
Most recommended
- China's pre-emptive crackdown: The people doth not protest
- China's foreign policy: Setting sail for Libya
- Turkey and Europe: Mr Erdoğan goes to Germany
- Oil and the economy: The 2011 oil shock
- Libya: The limpet's legions
- Banyan: Taiwan's commonsense consensus
- A special report on feeding the world: The 9 billion-people question
- KAL's cartoon
- Psychiatry: Therapist-free therapy
- Insider trading: A tip too far?
Over the past seven days
Advertisement
Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
- Hong Kong too-y
- From Asia view
- Look at that
- From Babbage
- Back to the bush
- From Baobab
Subscribe to The Economist's free e-mail newsletters and alerts.
Subscribe to The Economist's latest article postings on Twitter
See a selection of The Economist's articles, events, topical videos and debates on Facebook.
Advertisement
Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
It sounds like Peretz' point is that Israel is not the reason that the region is exploding. It's not even exploding over Arab governments' relationships or lack thereof with Israel. Israel is completely unrelated to the current blowup in the Middle East.
And it's true - this time. That does not mean that issues related to Israel are irrelevant to trying to create a peaceful future for the Middle East.
"It behooves both the Jews and the Arabs to settle their differences in a Christian manner!"
- The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas
I'm conflicted.
I like the analysis in all these posts about Egypt and the Arab uprisings, but.........
"Lexington"?
@Henry Bemis
Too much foreign policy? Well, it was the shot heard round the world. But - point taken. I'm thinking of Lexing on California next week.
Here are the mixed messages coming from the latest UN Meeting...
- Israel remains committed to regional peace with all its neighbours, including the Palestinians and the only way to peace is through negotiations, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's Office said overnight Friday after the US vetoed Palestinian resolution calling for condemnation of settlements
- The US stood alone among the 15 members of the Security Council in failing to condemn the resumption of settlement building. The 14 member countries backing the Arab-drafted resolution included Britain and France. Susan Rice said Washington's view was that the Israeli settlements lacked legitimacy, but added: "Unfortunately, this draft resolution risks hardening the positions of both sides and could encourage the parties to stay out of negotiations."
-The Palestinian observer at the UN, Riyadh Mansour, said the veto was unfortunate. "We fear that the message sent today may be one that only encourages further Israeli intransigence and impunity," he said.
I believe a truly independent and divinely mandated negotiator is required to preside over the goings on in Jerusalem. Righteous leadership is required during times of political, economic and social flux. People seek sanctuary in good leadership.
What is the circuit breaker ?
A regional conference should be called in Jerusalem. May 16th is the target date that many parties are aware of. As Napoleon said “Strategy is the art of using time and space well.” As prophesied, the centre of gravity is shifting to the Middle East and no matter what anyone does the momentum will only increase in the coming days and weeks. The various protests are a result of the status quo inhibiting young people’s ambitions. Managing from an ivory tower is never as good as actually engaging. A meeting in Jerusalem with various representatives from Israel, the West Bank, Gaza, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Egypt with other nations present should be called. A peace treaty could be negotiated. Various GDP's in the region...Israel US$292.7 billion; Jordan $31.01 B; Syria $96.53 B; Lebanon $53.81 B; Gaza $4 B; Saudi Arabia $600.4 B; Egypt $452.5 Billion. The total GDP of these eight areas is approx. $1.5 Trillion. This can increase by at least 5% per annum over the coming years if trust and co-operation increases. Israel’s GDP grew by 5.2% last year. Peacemaking like business is a dynamic process. Stasis and stagnation is dangerous. The vacuum of true vision and leadership needs to be filled. Confusion often precedes understanding.
Thanks Lexington! I do enjoy your insights, so please continue with some foreign policy mixed in with the rest of the political craziness generated here in the states.
Peretz is a fool of long standing, and is best ignored. Surprize us next time.
Britons are cute. "Rot."
Peretz has been suffering from a bad case of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias for the past 4 years at least. Not too unusual in libertarian conservatives (! myself included - the waste becomes unbearable after a point !). Its not surprising that he sees The Economist & Moussa in light of one qualified complement that he probably read. I wouldn't worry so much about it.