L.A. Times: No to warmongering on Iran
In an editorial Thursday, the L.A. Times argues against U.S. acquiescence to an Israeli attack on Iran. The editorialists write:
There are a dozen reasons why "If you want to whack them, we've got your back" is the wrong message for the U.S. to send Israel, publicly or privately.One is the increase in oil prices as a result of the war talk, which only enriches Iran. But here are two better ones: The consequences of an Israeli war with Iran are unpredictable, and it is nearly impossible to assess Iran's ability to make good on its threats to retaliate against the United States, presumably through its terrorist proxy, Hezbollah. The last thing the U.S. needs now is more instability, as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael G. Mullen said Wednesday. And while the odds may be low that diplomacy will solve the problem, we can't know for sure because we haven't tried it. Only the Europeans have. If bilateral talks with nuclear North Korea were acceptable to Bush, then why is it still anathema to talk with Iran?
The consequences of an Israeli war with Iran may be unpredictable, but the consequences for Israel of a nuclear-armed Iran are less unpredictable.
Sure, Iran might go nuclear and not attack the Jewish state, but is that a risk Israel can afford to take? Even if Iran held off from attacking Israel – which may be the likelier scenario, were Iran to go nuclear – the Islamic Republic would be able to brandish its nuclear threat over Israel like a mobster with a baseball bat. Is that something with which Israel would be able to live?
As for the oil reason, what's worse: Expensive gas, or a nuclear-armed Iran? The warmongering serves the free world well, because it's one more method to get Iran to quit its nuclear program that doesn't involve actually bombing the place. Thus, regardless of whether or not President Bush actually would give Israel the green light to bomb Iran, it's helpful that it appears as if he would.
For more on the degree to which rising oil prices are related to Iran-Israel tension, stay tuned for Ron Kampeas' piece on the subject in JTA (coming out later today).
Meanwhile, Ha'aretz's Avi Shavit writes that the scenario of Israel attacking Iran in the sunset of Bush's presidency (which our Ron Kampeas wrote about here), may be far-fetched, but there's so much at stake that Israel needs to get its ducks in a row just in case. The conclusion: Israel needs new elections now.
38 Comments
Share This
Bush,
Iran,
Israel
Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments
The United States is the largest state-sponsor of terrorism in the world. We’ve murdered over 1,000,000 people in the last 5 years. I could really care less about Iran or Israel right now because it doesn’t concern us but because you started it… Israel has nukes, what are they worried about? Your mobster with a baseball bat is a terrible analogy. It would be better if the mobster with a baseball bat (Iran) was trying to hurt an F-22 (Israel) but just gets blown to smithereens instead. If you research your history, you’ll learn that Israel & the U.S. have been the bullies while Iran has actually been quite peaceful while we’ve ravaged their country. It’s time to leave Iran alone and look inside ourselves and what we’ve been doing since the end of WWII. The best thing Israel and the U.S. can do is to try to set a good example and hope that others will emulate us. Otherwise, we’ll never learn.
“You’re right, the Palestinian people - have - and are - suffering; and, you are correct, they did endure a Nakba 60 years ago, and there is an important lesson there. But the lesson to be learned is not that the Nakba was the result of the creation of the State of Israel. Rather, it was the result of the Palestinian and Arab leadership rejecting the UN resolution calling for the establishment of both a Jewish state and a Palestinian-Arab state.
“The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution, but the Palestinian and Arab leadership did not, which they had a right to do. What they did not have a right to do was attack the nascent Jewish state with the objective - as they acknowledged at the time - of initiating a ‘war of extermination.’ The result was, therefore, a double Nakba: not only of Palestinian-Arab suffering and the creation of a Palestinian refugee problem, but also, with the assault on Israel and on Jews in Arab countries, the creation of a second, much less known, group of refugees - Jewish refugees from Arab countries.”
IT IS tragic to appreciate that had the Partition Resolution been accepted 60 years ago, there would have been no Arab-Israeli war - no refugees, Jewish or Arab - and none of the pain and suffering since. Indeed, we would have been celebrating the 60th anniversary of both the State of Israel and the State of Palestine.
Moreover, this “double rejectionism,” where Arab leadership was prepared to forgo the establishment of a Palestinian state if it meant countenancing a Jewish state in any borders, not only found expression 60 years ago, but has underpinned the Arab-Israeli-Palestinian conflict ever since.
Yet the revisionist Mideast narrative - prejudicial to authentic reconciliation and peace between peoples as well as between states - continues to hold that there was only one victim population, Palestinian refugees, and that Israel was responsible for the Palestinian Nakba of 1948.
The result is that the pain and plight of 850,000 Jews uprooted and displaced from Arab countries - the forgotten exodus - has been both expunged and eclipsed from both the Middle East peace and justice narratives these past 60 years.
YET THE United Nations once again commemorated the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People on the 60th anniversary of the United Nations Partition Resolution of November 29, 1947, and continued to ignore the plight of Jewish refugees on this commemorative occasion, thereby indulging and encouraging this Mideast revisionism.
Moreover, this revisionist narrative has not only eclipsed - and erased - the forgotten exodus from memory and remembrance, but it also denies that it was a forced exodus, and one that resulted from both double rejectionism and double aggression. This is the real Nakba - the real double catastrophes.
Simply put, the Arab countries not only rejected a Palestinian state and went to war to extinguish the nascent Jewish state, but also targeted the Jewish nationals living in their respective countries, thereby creating two refugee populations - the Palestinian refugee population resulting from the Arab war against Israel, and the Jewish refugees resulting from the Arab war against its own Jewish nationals.
Indeed, evidence contained in a recent report entitled “Jewish Refugees from Arab Countries: The Case for Rights And Redress” documents for the first time a pattern of state-sanctioned repression and persecution in Arab countries - including Nuremberg-like laws - that targeted its Jewish populations, resulting in denationalization, forced expulsions, illegal sequestration of property, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and murder - namely, anti-Jewish pogroms. And while the internal Jewish narrative has often referred to pogroms as European attacks on their Jewish nationals, it has often ignored Arab-Muslim attacks on their Jewish nationals.
Moreover, as the report also documents, these massive human rights violations were not only the result of state-sanctioned patterns of oppression in each of the Arab countries, but they were reflective of a collusive blueprint, as embodied in the Draft Law of the Political Committee of the League of Arab States.
This is a story that has not been heard. It is a story that has not yet even been told. It is a truth that must now be acknowledged.
REGRETTABLY, THE United Nations also bears express and continuing responsibility for this distorted Middle East and peace narrative. Since 1948, there have been more than 130 UN resolutions that have specifically dealt with the Palestinian refugee plight. Yet, not one of these UN Resolutions makes any reference to, nor is there any expression of concern for, the plight of the 850,000 Jews displaced from Arab countries. Nor have any of the Arab countries involved - or the Palestinian leadership involved - expressed any acknowledgement, let alone regret, for this pain and suffering, or for their respective responsibility for the pain and suffering.
How do we rectify this historical - and sustaining - injustice? What are the rights and remedies available under international human rights and humanitarian law? And what are the corresponding duties and obligations incumbent upon the United Nations, Arab countries, and members of the international community?
What follows is a nine-point international human rights action agenda.
• First, it must be appreciated that while justice has long been delayed, it must no longer be denied. The time has come to rectify this historical injustice, and to restore the plight and truth of the “forgotten exodus” of Jews from Arab countries to the Middle East narrative from which they have been expunged and eclipsed these 60 years.
• Second, remedies for victim refugee groups - including rights of remembrance, truth, justice and redress, as mandated under human rights and humanitarian law - must now be invoked for Jews displaced from Arab countries.
• Third, in the manner of duties and responsibilities, each of the Arab countries - and the League of Arab States - must acknowledge their role and responsibility in their double aggression of launching an aggressive war against Israel and the perpetration of human rights violations against their respective Jewish nationals. The culture of impunity must end.
• Fourth, the Arab League Peace Plan of 2002 should incorporate the question of Jewish refugees from Arab countries as part of its narrative for an Israeli-Arab peace, just as the Israeli narrative now incorporates the issue of Palestinian refugees in its vision of an Israeli-Arab peace.
• Fifth, on the international level, the UN General Assembly - in the interests of justice and equity - should include reference to Jewish refugees as well as Palestinian refugees in its annual resolutions; the UN Human Rights Council should address, as it has yet to do, the issue of Jewish as well as Palestinian refugees; UN agencies dealing with compensatory efforts for Palestinian refugees should also address Jewish refugees form Arab countries.
• Sixth, the annual Nov. 29th commemoration by the United Nations of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People should be transformed into an International Day of Solidarity for a Two-State Solution - as the initial 1947 Partition Resolution intended - including solidarity with all refugees created by the Israeli-Arab conflict.
• Seventh, jurisdiction over Palestinian refugees should be transferred from UNWRA to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. There was no justification then - and still less today - for the establishment of a separate body to deal only with Palestinian refugees, particularly when that body is itself compromised by its incitement to hatred and violence, as well as its revisionist teaching of the Mideast peace and justice narrative.
• Eighth, any bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations - which one hopes will presage a just and lasting peace - should include Jewish refugees as well as Palestinian refugees in an inclusive joinder of discussion.
• Ninth, during any and all discussions on the Middle East by the Quartet and others, any explicit reference to Palestinian refugees should be paralleled by a reference to Jewish refugees from Arab countries.
THE EXCLUSION and denial of rights and redress to Jewish refugees from Arab countries will prejudice authentic negotiations between the parties and undermine the justice and legitimacy of any agreement.
Let there be no mistake about it. Where there is no remembrance, there is no truth; where there is no truth, there will be no justice; where there is no justice, there will be no reconciliation; and where there is no reconciliation, there will be no peace - which we all seek.
IRAN MUST BE BOMB. TO DEAL WITH IRAN, THE ONLY WAY TO PEACE IS WAR !!!!
It is very sad how some are not thinking but are promoting war but not peace. All sides need to sit down and talk and agree that the best interest to all involved is not using force or threats but to use common sense and remove all the fear the government of Iran has, so they won’t need to have a nuclear weapon. If there was an understanding and respect amongst the two or three parties, with Iran, Israel and the U.S., then like the North Koreans, Iranians can be convinced that they will be treated as equal and encouraged to use energy from nuclear power. However, if people like Arkady are involved there will no be peace in the Middle East, and the world will suffer another unnecessary war. God help us all.
So the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) works diplomatically with communists but not with Islamists and Isralis??? Even if Israel were wiped off the map by Iran, Israel’s muclear armed subs would make Iran one vast globule of glass, and the vaunted long Persian history would come to an abrupt radioactive end.
The concept of mutual assured destruction by each nation if attacked, should be the expressed public policy. Fearing hell will get you to heaven has worked with religion, and is one hell of a diplomatic weapon which has worked in the cold war.
Do you think keeping oil prices high trumps MAD from being ballyhooded with gusto in the middle east??
a small group of desert people wrote a fictional book in which a fictional god granted them israel, a fictional country. who cares? let the israelis fight alone, i don’t owe them anything.
Yon Ram you’re a vicious ZIONAZI
nasty nasty nasty little extremist person, promoting war and death and destruction
In response to this Jewish lady yon ram, she is talking about resolutions. she has no idea what has been happening in UN for past 6 years, here are just a few resolotion against israel.
1.Resolution 106: “… ‘condemns’ Israel for Gaza raid”
2.Resolution 111: “...’condemns’ Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people”
3.Resolution 127: “...’recommends’ Israel suspend its ‘no-man’s zone’ in Jerusalem”
4.Resolution 162: “...’urges’ Israel to comply with UN decisions”
5.Resolution 171: “...determines flagrant violations’ by Israel in its attack on Syria”
6.Resolution 228: “...’censures’ Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control”
7.Resolution 237: “...’urges’ Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees”
8.Resolution 248: “… ‘condemns’ Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan”
9.Resolution 250: “… ‘calls’ on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem”
10.Resolution 251: “… ‘deeply deplores’ Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250”
11.Resolution 252: “...’declares invalid’ Israel’s acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital”
12.Resolution 256: “… ‘condemns’ Israeli raids on Jordan as ‘flagrant violation"”
13.Resolution 259: “...’deplores’ Israel’s refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation”
14.Resolution 262: “...’condemns’ Israel for attack on Beirut airport”
15.Resolution 265: “… ‘condemns’ Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan”
16.Resolution 267: “...’censures’ Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem”
17.Resolution 270: “...’condemns’ Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon”
18.Resolution 271: “...’condemns’ Israel’s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem”
19.Resolution 279: “...’demands’ withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon”
20.Resolution 280: “....’condemns’ Israeli’s attacks against Lebanon”
21.Resolution 285: “...’demands’ immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon”
22.Resolution 298: “...’deplores’ Israel’s changing of the status of Jerusalem”
23.Resolution 313: “...’demands’ that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon”
24.Resolution 316: “...’condemns’ Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon”
25.Resolution 317: “...’deplores’ Israel’s refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon”
26.Resolution 332: “...’condemns’ Israel’s repeated attacks against Lebanon”
27.Resolution 337: “...’condemns’ Israel for violating Lebanon’s sovereignty”
28.Resolution 347: “...’condemns’ Israeli attacks on Lebanon”
29.Resolution 425: “...’calls’ on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon”
30.Resolution 427: “...’calls’ on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon’
31.Resolution 444: “...’deplores’ Israel’s lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces”
32.Resolution 446: “...’determines’ that Israeli settlements are a ‘serious obstruction’ to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention”
33.Resolution 450: “...’calls’ on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon”
34.Resolution 452: “...’calls’ on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories”
35.Resolution 465: “...’deplores’ Israel’s settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel’s settlements program”
36.Resolution 467: “...’strongly deplores’ Israel’s military intervention in Lebanon”
37.Resolution 468: “...’calls’ on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return”
38.Resolution 469: “...’strongly deplores’ Israel’s failure to observe the council’s order not to deport Palestinians”
39.Resolution 471: “… ‘expresses deep concern’ at Israel’s failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention”
40.Resolution 476: “… ‘reiterates’ that Israel’s claims to Jerusalem are ‘null and void’”
41.Resolution 478: “...’censures (Israel) in the strongest terms’ for its claim to Jerusalem in its ‘Basic Law’”
42.Resolution 484: “...’declares it imperative’ that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors”
43.Resolution 487: “...’strongly condemns’ Israel for its attack on Iraq’s nuclear facility”
44.Resolution 497: “...’decides’ that Israel’s annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights is ‘null and void’ and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith”
45.Resolution 498: “...’calls’ on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon”
46.Resolution 501: “...’calls’ on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops”
47.Resolution 509: “...’demands’ that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon”
48.Resolution 515: “...’demands’ that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in”
49.Resolution 517: “...’censures’ Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon”
50.Resolution 518: “...’demands’ that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon”
51.Resolution 520: “...’condemns’ Israel’s attack into West Beirut”
52.Resolution 573: “...’condemns’ Israel ‘vigorously’ for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters
53.Resolution 587: “...’takes note’ of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw”
54.Resolution 592: “...’strongly deplores’ the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops”
55.Resolution 605: “...’strongly deplores’ Israel’s policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians
56.Resolution 607: “...’calls’ on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention
57.Resolution 608: “...’deeply regrets’ that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians”
58.Resolution 636: “...’deeply regrets’ Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians
59.Resolution 641: “...’deplores’ Israel’s continuing deportation of Palestinians
60.Resolution 672: “...’condemns’ Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
61.Resolution 673: “...’deplores’ Israel’s refusal to cooperate with the United Nations
62.Resolution 681: “...’deplores’ Israel’s resumption of the deportation of Palestinians
63.Resolution 694: “...’deplores’ Israel’s deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return
64.Resolution 726: “...’strongly condemns’ Israel’s deportation of Palestinians
65.Resolution 799: “...’strongly condemns’ Israel’s deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.
Hope this will satisfy her if something else did not.
Iran doesn’t need nuclear weapons. They have something almost as good; a commanding position on the Strait of Hormuz. This, combined with credible long range missels armed conventionally, will always be enough to get the world’s, and even Israel’s attention when push comes to shove. Such as now.
Most thought that Saddam was lying when he said he had no WMD. Turns out he was telling the truth and Bush was lying. The incredulous can happen.
Remember, it was the American president Nixon who convinced the Iranians to use nuclear power for Iran and sell their oil to the US in 1973. This makes even more sense for Iran today.
Lav
Leave a Comment
To comment on this article, you must first be registered with JTA.
Not Registered?
There are real advantages to a FREE registration with JTA.org:
- Make your voice heard through comments on articles
- Receive our e-mailed Daily Briefing, an invaluable quick-read
- Help decide what Jewish news matters most with interactive tools
Register Now
Already a JTA member?
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Mark S. Devenow on After prayer and punch, Foreman takes Jewish victory lap
- M.A. Kinnaman on After prayer and punch, Foreman takes Jewish victory lap
- Steve007 on After prayer and punch, Foreman takes Jewish victory lap
- steve ariza on After prayer and punch, Foreman takes Jewish victory lap
- Lauryn on NIF on defense for 'rape' poster demonizing Israel
Basil
07/03/08 11:56 AM
This situation allows criminal states like Israel to coerce and bully other states and other peoples and even blackmail the entire world. It allows Israel to bomb Tunis, Baghdad, Syria and threaten to bomb the Egyptian Aswan Dam and then tell the helpless victims “hit me back if you dare.”