Thursday, May 13, 2021

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's Israel dictionary | IJN - Intermountain Jewish News - Dictionary

This, from an Israeli Member of Knesset:

“Will they [opponents of Biden] continue to fight amongst themselves and in the process prop up a corrupt leader who puts his own interests ahead of his country, or will they join together to begin the difficult task of rooting out corruption and reinstating the rule of law?”

It is hard to imagine an act of foreign interference in internal American affairs more direct than this statement. It not only passes judgment on the current American administration but calls for its enemies to replace it! (to root out its corruption and reinstate the rule of law).

The alliance of interests and of values between Israel and the US does not bestow on any Israeli lawmaker the right to summon his or her ideological allies in the US to overturn an American election, in the name of the “rule of law,” no less! This is beyond the pale.

• • •

Beyond the pale — yes, if the gesture came from an Israeli Member of Knesset. But what if it didn’t? What if it came from a United States Senator, and the object of the hostility were an Israeli head of state? Would that still be beyond the pale?

In fact, in the quote of the Israeli Member of Knesset above, change one word. Change “Biden” to “Netanyahu.” Now you have the real quote, the accurate quote, the one that was stated, not by any Israeli Member of Knesset — that never happened; we made it up — but it did happen as a statement by an American member of the US Senate: Elizabeth Warren. That, we didn’t make up.

Addressing the (virtual) J Street national conference on April 19, 2021, Sen. Warren made the remarks precisely as reproduced above, with the sole exception of one word. She said “Netanyahu,”not “Biden.” Her remarks constituted an act of foreign interference in internal Israeli affairs, not only passing judgment on them but calling for the replacement of its current, elected leader, Benjamin Netanyahu.

This is the level of arrogant presumption about Israel on the part of one person in the leadership of the Democratic party. Keep in mind: Netanyahu was the elected leader of Israel when Sen. Warren made these remarks, and remains so today, despite the fact that he failed to form a new government and despite the fact that Yair Lapid has now been tasked with forming, but has not formed, a new government.

Keep in mind a lot more. In Warren’s speech, she not only called for Netanyahu’s opponents to “root him out.” She called on Palestinians to hold elections not just in the West Bank but also in Gaza, controlled by Hamas, even though such elections would ” (Warren’s word) add many members of Hamas to the Palestinian parliament. Warren herself characterizes Hamas as a “terrorist organization,” and says, one “cannot . . . reject democratic outcomes we don’t like.” This is how Warren adds up Palestinian elections: They would “likely” bring terrorists to political power; and, “we . . . need to support the Palestinians in their efforts to hold elections.” The best Warren can say is that if Palestinians elect members of Hamas — which has launched missiles at Israeli civilians for 16 years — Hamas will, to warrant US engagement, have to “renounce violence.” Fat chance.

In analyses of speeches such as these, the charge is often made that words are taken out of context. We have no hesitation in recommending to readers of this page  to look up the full text of Warren’s speech. We trust readers to decide for themselves whether any mischaracterization of her remarks is made here.

Keep this in mind: Warren supports restricting American military aid to Israel from being used in the occupied territories (again, her words). Observe: Palestinian terrorist attacks on Israelis originate in the territories and Gaza. Restrictions on the use of American military aid there would mean Israeli renunciation of stopping such terrorist attacks before they proceed (when Israeli intelligence is sufficient to achieve this) or responding to such terrorist attacks after they occur. According to Sen. Warren, Israel should sit back and let its citizens be slaughtered by Palestinian terrorists unless it can manage otherwise without American financed weaponry.

Lest Warren thinks this is some overwrought, hypothetical, paranoid way of looking at things, ask the family of 19-year-old Yehuda Guetta. He was shot dead (along with two other Israelis who did not die) for the crime of standing at a bus stop in the northern West Bank on May 2, 2021. Is the West Bank to be Judenrein, forbidden for Jews to ride buses there, in Warren’s vision of a two-state solution?

Alas, add to the death of Yehuda Guetta many prior deaths of unarmed Israeli civilians at the hands of Palestinians going back continuously, in the West Bank and not in the West Bank, even prior to Israel’s victory in the West Bank in 1967, prior to Israel’s creation in 1947, back to the 19th century. American military aid to Israel to help it fight terrorism is a pragmatic and a moral blessing, not subject to pragmatic or moral division by boundaries.

Keep this in mind too: Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas “has shown genuine commitment to non-violence” (Warren’s words; and again, feel free to check if we’ve cited her out of context). In what sense is a “commitment to non-violence” consonant with Abbas’ commitment to pay Palestinians “salaries” for killing unarmed Israelis and Americans and to pay “salaries” to the families of these Palestinian killers, too? Abbas, genuine commitment to non-violence — in what world is Sen. Warren living? In what dictionary does her definition of “commitment” and “non-violence” appear?

Keep this in mind: Sen. Warren states that “few Palestinians have any access to life-saving [COVID vaccination] shots” and that Israel “controls the West Bank and all movement of people and goods that go into and out of the Palestinian Territories.” Is Sen. Warren suggesting that Israel is intentionally preventing Palestinians from receiving vaccinations? Does this linkage of vaccinations and Israeli control not tread perilously close to the medieval canard that Jews causedthe plague? It is one thing to assert, as Warren asserts, that Israel has an obligation under the Geneva Conventions to vaccinate the Palestinian population; it is radically different to suggest that the reason why “few Palestinians” have access to shots is because Israel “controls all movement of people and goods” in and out of the Palestinian territories.

Keep this in mind: Sen. Warren regards the Trump administration as having “undermined 50 years of US leadership as an effective mediator by abandoning any pretense of neutrality and jumping directly into the peace process in a way that put a thumb on the scales by giving a green light to settlements . . . and publishing a one-sided peace plan.” This is a contradiction in terms. Whatever else one might say about Trump’s peace plan for Israel and the Palestinians, it called for a four-year settlement freeze by Israel — and Israel accepted it! Warren and her likeminded allies such as President Obama never achieved that. Similar to Warren’s call on Hamas to renounce violence,Warren’s plans for Israel have no traction.

When Sen. Warren states, “We [Israel and the US] share many common interests and common values,” we cannot see what, from her point of view, these commonalities are. They do not include the high value of peace as concretized in the four new peace agreements that Trump forged between Israel and four Muslim countries. About them, Warren said absolutely nothing. About Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital of Israel, Warren said she opposed the recognition.

What is Sen. Warren all about? “Tough love” (her words) for Israel. Her tough love would increase Hamas’ political power, open up Israel to even more terrorist attacks than it is already absorbing, overlook the Palestinian Authority’s financial support for terrorism, blame Israel for COVID among the Palestinians, ignore Trump’s successes in the Middle East, and keep Jerusalem in limbo until “the Israelis and the Palestinians . . . determine the final status of Jerusalem” — the same theoretical rhetoric that, as Warren writes, has failed over the past 50 years.

In Sen. Warren’s dictionary, “tough love” leapfrogs over realities on the ground while decrying others’ “empty rhetoric.” She is blind to her own.

Copyright © 2021 by the Intermountain Jewish News

No comments:

Post a Comment