Ross, moving on-- to where?
When a high-level US official dealing with Middle East affairs gets "reassigned", why I am not surprised that the story gets broken in Israel before any murmur of it emerges in the US media?
Haaretz's Barak Ravid wrote a couple hours ago (HT: Bill the spouse) that,
- Dennis Ross, who most recently served as a special State Department envoy to Iran, will abruptly be relieved of his duties, sources in Washington told Haaretz. An official announcement is expected in the coming days.
The Obama administration will announce that Ross has been reassigned to another position in the White House. In his new post, the former Mideast peace envoy under President Bill Clinton will deal primarily with regional issues related to the peace process.
My only concern is the fuzziness over where Ross is heading.
Good that he's off the Iran case. But is it really true that he will "will deal primarily with regional issues related to the peace process"? H'mm. Only firmly under the leadership and control of presidential peace envoy Sen. George Mitchell, I hope.
Ravid and, guess who, Marty Peretz, are both raising the irrelevant and deceptive question of "Is Ross's ouster because he's a Jew?"
No, Barak and Marty, the two reasons it's good and appropriate that Dennis Ross is being removed (I hope) from any position of importance on Middle East issues are
- 1. Because he has very recently done some contract work on high-level strategic planning issues for a foreign government, the Government of Israel, in his capacity as founding President of the Jerusalem-based Jewish People's Public Policy Institute, and
2. Because he recently co-authored an upcoming book that argues strongly against a key proposition upheld by his principals in the Obama administration: namely that there is a strong link between Iran policy and Arab-Israeli peacemaking.
So enough already with this raising the canard of anti-Semitism.
Yes, I know anti-Semitism exists, and can be literally lethal-- as, too sadly, it proved to be in Washington DC last week. But that fact does not give everyone of the Jewish faith/nationality a free pass to ward off any criticisms of their actions.
(Last note to Barak Ravid: When you quote "a diplomatic source in Jerusalem" as speculating that "perhaps Ross preferred to work for the National Security Agency, which answers directly to President Barack Obama", it is very unclear indeed what this source-- or you-- are referring to. The NSA is a quite technical agency, that under Bush/Cheney listened to my phone calls and everyone else's that it wanted to. The National Security Council is the body that reports directly to the Prez, though through Gen. Jim Jones. I doubt if he'd want Dennis on his staff, but let's see.)
The report that Dennis Ross has been sacked from from being 'the presence of America' on Iran (or anything else) is very good news indeed.
But it is disturbing that this news breaks in Israel before it does in the US.
"the former Mideast peace envoy under President Bill Clinton will deal primarily with regional issues related to the peace process."
I for one do not see this as good news at all. Dennis Ross can never be expected to be a positive force in any aspect of the "peace process".
I hope and pray that this is true and that Ross is being kicked upstairs, NOT given more power. If so, I would count it as Obama's first actual positive step towards regional peace. But the question still remains - will he confront Israel, as he MUST. Israel must face consequences - one of Obama's favorite words - if it fails to freeze the settlements, and it must face further consequences if it continues to insist on inserting poison pills into peace negotiations. Netanyahu blatantaly tried to throw a couple of wrenches into the works in his speech. Not satisified with the wholly unnecessary demand that Palestine recognize Israel (de facto should be enough), he wants them to recognize Israel as a Jewish state!!! That's stopper and he knows it. And too, he wants Palestine to be demilitarized - that too is an obvious stopper. For Palestine to be a sovereign state, it will have to have real security forces. Obama must stop Netanyahu's stoppers.
Epppie, it is clear that what Netanyahu calls a "Palestinian state" is a set of disconnected cantons with its own postage stamps, and a flag. Not going to happen.
Not true, Shirin! It's what the Palestinians already have... Okay, they don't have the postage stamps, but they do have the internet domain of 'PS', which is the modern equivalent...
And they have 34 heftily over-funded government "minstries", too! Woo-hoo.
Oh yeah, Helena, I forgot.
Well, maybe they'll be allowed to have their own currency?
A "lapsed" Christian American, I ain't got no dawg in that there fight - cept I wish my tax dollars weren't underwriting the "settlements" and the rest of it, specially when there's a dang sight better use for those dollars here at home. Nothing to add, cept this: nuclear-armed, fanatical, religious fundamentalists who can't "handle modernity" - that's either slapstick - a trick cigar supposed to go off in our face - or Samuel Beckett on steroids. It's gotta be one or the other because surely the Neocons and Netanyahu are talking about themselves. "There you go again, Pogo."
It's not just the settlements and the armaments, Jeb, that's the least of it. The big ticket items are the Egypts and Jordans: it is shutting out the people in countries like that (and there are a few of them) that costs the money.
It also postpones the reckoning too, because there is no future in Mubarak style or even King Abdullah style dictatorships. They are going to fall and when they do...
Epppie, it is clear that what Netanyahu calls a "Palestinian state" is a set of disconnected cantons with its own postage stamps, and a flag. Not going to happen.
There is a great piece today by some dutch writer that interestingly reads:
The EU wishes to ignore all these events and clings to the idea of a "viable Palestinian state," which is an oxymoron. The Palestinians have tribal communities and only fake having a modern civil society. No civil institutions have been built because they are not in the interest of the leading Palestinian families.
the piece is a gem as it is candid and no-nonsense, check it out at:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244371106469&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
"the piece is...no-nonsense"
Oh contraire, the piece is nothing but nonsense, and the product of a huge helping of ignorance. Gee, I don't wonder that you think it is a "gem".
Thanks for the heads-up. The article must be a no-nonsense gem if Shirin has given it one of her definitive "thumbs-down" responses.
What I liked most about De Winter's argument are his suggestions as to where Israel might shop around for allies. I think it is particularly inciteful of him to suggest Russia. After all, Russian is not only surrounded by Muslims; they also have signifcant Muslim populations within their borders. It would be interesting to see how the "liberals" of the world would react to, say, a Georgia armed and supported jointly by Russia and Israel being attacked by, say, an Azerbaijan armed and supported jointly by the US and Iran!
But the question still remains - will he confront Israel, as he MUST. Israel must face consequences - one of Obama's favorite words - if it fails to freeze the settlements, and it must face further consequences if it continues to insist on inserting poison pills into peace negotiations.
All these speculations about Obama and the Middle East are based on the supposition that the US is going to act as an "honest broker" in the conflict, and that Obama really wants the best for all. Nothing is further from the truth, I fear.
Just to give some alternative view on Obama, the vision of Paul Street (a journalist, historian and writer who followed Obama closely, wrote a lot about the man and wasn't too impressed by him, to say the least):
Niebuhr Lives, Civilians Die in the Age of Obama
June 15, 2009 By Paul Street
Ever since the beginning of Barack Obama's presidency I've been telling liberals and leftists why they should not be surprised at the new chief executive's continuation and even expansion of various supreme United States policy evils. The evils in question include Obama's continuation of the criminal occupation of Iraq, the escalation of U.S. imperial violence with significant predictable "collateral damage" (the "inadvertent" murder of innocent civilians) in Afghanistan and Pakistan, continuing U.S. backing (beneath the myth [1] that Obama is reversing prior U.S. support for Israeli aggression and apartheid) of Israel's brutal oppression of the Palestinians, the granting of massive taxpayer bailouts to corporate and Wall Street perpetrators and the increase of Pentagon funding while millions more are pushed into economic destitution at home and abroad and the pushing of corporate-friendly health-care "reform" over the obvious efficient and social democratic solution of single-payer. Truth be told, the list goes on and on.
continued here
JES,
1) Just as long as you-all aren't "shopping around" with my dollar
2) ad hominem I think that's called - your ungentlemanly argument (though "attack" is a better word)directed Shirin-wards
3) So "Muslims" are the problem, is that right? Is that all Muslims or just some of them or what? So where would you take us? Where do "we"* go from here? "Exterminate the brutes" a la Kurtz? Or what?
*Include me out, pal.
Well, Jeb, ya'all don't have to be worried none, because we'll be shoppin' 'round with our own dolla, that is if Obama don't turn out to be another one-termer like Jimma (which it's increasingly lookin' like he is).
I see ya'll ain't been around these parts much or witnessed Shirin's "charm". Or her ability to do ad hominem (why, that's a big word for y'all). Or her plain ungentlemanly behavior.
And no, I didn't mean all Muslims. I only meant the radical Islamic kind (you know, the ones who did 9/11).
I hope this catches y'all after ya get back from yer possum huntin' so y'all be in a good mood.
The Obama administration will announce that Ross has been reassigned to another position in the White House. In his new post, the former Mideast peace envoy under President Bill Clinton will deal primarily with regional issues related to the peace process.
He goes from being Clinton's minder to joining forces with Rahm Emanuel as Obama's minder and you think it's good news?
These Obamanable Snowmen and women are too much, really. Watch out for the yellow snow in the middle of his snowjob.
I used to think that Voltaire was laying it on too thick with Dr Pangloss, but it's clear to me now that he must have met some Obama supporters in a time warp of some kind, on a trip from the best of all possible worlds.
Ravid and, guess who, Marty Peretz, are both raising the irrelevant and deceptive question of "Is Ross's ouster because he's a Jew?"
I just got around to reading Marty Peretz's blog post and the Ravid piece in Ha'aretz.
You've gotta be kidding Helena - either that or highly disingenuous... or just plain...well.
What both pieces plainly state is that "[o]ne possibility is Iran's persistent refusal to accept Ross as a U.S. emissary given the diplomat's Jewish background as well as his purported pro-Israel leanings."
BTW, I think that your tsk, tsk and rather churlish cricism of Barak Ravid was out of place. I'm dare say the confusion resulted from a translation error rather than a misunderstanding.
I don't think that it's Marty Peretz or Ravid who are raising the canard of anti-Semitism!
Carter enters Gaza for Hamas talks
Carter told students at a graduation ceremony in the Strip: "I have to hold back tears when I see the deliberate destruction that has been raged against your people."
Carter is also scheduled to meet Ismail Haniya, a Hamas leader, during his visit.
"Hamas leaders want peace and they want to have reconciliation not only with their Fatah brothers but also eventually with Israelis to live side by side, with two nations, both sovereign nations, recognised by each other and living in peace. That's what I hope to see in the future," Carter said.
Carter told the Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper, in an interview published on Sunday: "To me, the most grievous circumstance is the maltreatment of the people in Gaza, who are literally starving and have no hope at this time.
"They're being treated like savages. The alleviation of their plight ... I think, would be the most important [thing] the Israeli PM could do."
Ross wasn't ever "a special State Department envoy to Iran" or an envoy of any kind.
Um, JES, did you check the headline on the Marty Peretz piece. As fo now it reads: "Dennis Ross, Out As Special Envoy To Iran; Was He Ousted Because He's A Jew Or A Bit Hawkish On Nukes?" Of course, he might change it if he judges it too incendiary. Barak Ravid's lede already got changed once to exclude or tone down the suggestion that the reported move against Dennis was "because he's a Jew."
Inciteful? Insightful? H'mm. Quite different meanings... Plus, I find your grasp of geopolitics hilarious. An alliance of Russia, Israel, and Georgia??
Maybe we'd better all stick to the topic of the main post rather than get dragged into geopolitical diversions like this one.
By the way, congratulations on your new blog. Interested readers can now access it through the hyperlink in your name (as I'm sure they realize.)
So, Helena, you're excuse for blaming both writers of falling back on the anti-Semitism cardard is that you don't read beyond the headlines? That is hilarious.
An alliance of Russia, Georgia and Isrel? Not any more absurd than of the US, Azerbaijan and Iran. Yet with the current occupant of the White House, it may not be that absurd.
As for the mix-up in words, well we all make mistakes.
Gee, I'm sorry. That should have read "your excuse", not "you're excuse". It's early.
One possibility is Iran's persistent refusal to accept Ross as a U.S. emissary given the diplomat's Jewish background
And why shouldn't this be an issue, since it's clearly an issue for you that ross serves on an organization devoted to the Jewish people? It doesn't suppose that the Obama administration is antisemitic -- but that the Iranian leadership might be -- or like you presuppose "dual loyalties". which would distract from Ross' role as "emissary" -- not really his role, but do you even care????
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5huua__uz6CT_nLkXUcUcOsX033iw
State Department officials insisted he was not an envoy or a negotiator, but rather an adviser and coordinator of policies
As an "astute reader", I don't see anywhere on the Internet where Dennis Ross was "founding President of the Jerusalem-based Jewish People's Public Policy Institute". (According to the JPPI official Web site, that would be Prof. Yehezkel Dror.) Further, I don't see anywhere in the Ha'aretz article you cited a single reference to Dennis Ross having "very recently done some contract work on high-level strategic planning issues for a foreign government" - in fact, I didn't see any references to Ross at all! (The article speaks of the JPPI having been assigned the task of defining programs to link the Jewish Diaspora more closely with Israel. If that's "high-level strategic planning", well I certainly find your interpretation of both "high-level" and "strategic" amusing.)
Again, according to the JPPI Web site, Dennis Ross was Chairmain of the institute (a largely honerary position - probably with a fat honorarium). That's it. To suggest more is simply foolish, disingenuous or outright mendacious.
Hmmm, this June 18 article in the Wall Street Journal states that Dennis Ross is being brought into the White House as a special advisor. It gives the impression that he will actually have increased influence over US policy on Iran.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124528335396725547.html?mod=googlenews_wsj