Marty Peretz: Based On All Available Evidence I Disagree With Susan Rice, Who Is Nonetheless Awesome In Every Way (Plus: Misguided Victim-Complex Paranoia On The Pro-Israel Right)
Another post on this nonsense. Peretz's paragraphs in order, skipping the opening five about what a neat guy Louis Brandeis was:
The ZOA has assaulted Obama from the sidelines. Not really on the basis of anything he said. And certainly not on the basis of the men and women he has put into positions of decisive power. What can these critics say about Mrs. Clinton? That once long ago she kissed Mrs. Arafat?
While it's not great that Obama's least anti-Israel foreign policy appointment is still someone who embraced Arafat right after that woman uttered a blood libel - no. The proper answer to "Clinton is pro-Israel" is "maybe - but she seems awfully irrelevant on foreign policy in the short-term just like Rahm Emanuel."
The evidence components of their aggressions are simply pathetic. Susan Rice is one of their targets. I do not know Ms. Rice. I have never met her. And, yes, I have criticized her on occasion. That's what free journalists do in a free society. But the ZOA has stigmatized her as one of Israel's most baleful enemies. And here my observation about Brandeis' high standard for evidence comes into play. The evidence the organization assembles is pathetic. My God, how many public figures have mentioned James Baker as special envoy to the Middle East? He is a malevolent figure, certified in his malevolence towards Israel and towards Jews. But his name is commonly held to be apt for the post. Like Bill Clinton, who in some way really loves Israel, did more harm on the White House lawn and at Camp David than Baker ever did, even inspired by his prejudices. There will be a test for Susan Rice and for Barack Obama very soon. Whether she opposes the United States participating in the United Nations' gang rape of Israel at Durban II. I doubt that she will.
I blocked the entire paragraph just so you can be sure that I'm not leaving anything out. Here are Peretz's arguments - made condescendingly while sneering the difference between "high standards" and "pathetic" evidence - in order: (1) He doesn't know much about Rice (2) What he does know he disagrees with (3) Rice is certainly not as bad as James Baker (true!) (4) Democrats like Bill Clinton - and presumably Rice - are deeply misguided about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (5) It would be really nice if Rice would do something that Peretz could support (6) We aren't actually sure she'll do that. Did I miss anything? Because if not then it seems like his two defenses are that he disagrees with her and that she doesn't openly hate Jews. Super!
And now I come to the ZOA's other victim of the day, Samantha Power... Samantha is a friend, a good friend, in fact. She has uttered some phrases about Israel that I did not like and that I thought were erroneous. We have quarreled over them... How can she not grasp deeply Jewish nationalism, its romance and its realities? Has she made mistakes? Have I not made mistakes? The fact is that she truly, truly loves Israel and the people of Israel. They appeal to both her ecstatic imagination and to her understanding of the gravity of the world. To her defiance and to her discipline. If anybody thinks she is an enemy of Israel or even less than that, not a true friend, that anybody needs to know that love and affection always require questions. Adoration does not help Israel. It misleads it.
That's the second out of two Obama appointees that Peretz defends by pointing out how much he disagrees with them. Persuasive. And why is it that center-left foreign policy experts are always showing their "true friendship" to Israel via tough "questions" - but when they travel to the Arab and Muslim world it's like they're going to Canossa?
Pro-Israel leftists should just admit that Obama's appointees are hostile to the US-Israel relationship. It's not that hard. It's not like the right doesn't do it. Bush I's Secretary of State was Baker. Done and done. Bush II appointed Condoleezza Rice, who at first she seemed like a good choice. But - like most Cabinet officials - she ended up getting captured by her department and she embraced State's two dogmas about Israel. Since then her State-oriented Middle East diplomacy has been a disaster everywhere from Lebanon to Saudi Arabia to Israel.
Right-wing pro-Israel activists ascribe her actions to malice. That's a mistake. Just like it's a mistake when they sometimes hysterically ascribe Obama's policies to animus. And - Peretz is right - it's a mistake to think that Rice and Power are motivated by hatred. It's just not true.
The US's diplomatic train wrecks happen in large part because the State Department has institutional interests in missing the forest for the trees and pretending that the Arab world is a nation-state system. They're wrong about how to approach a world that they're already wrong about. But those flaws are institutional. Condi Rice doesn't wake up every morning wondering how she can coerce Israel into disastrous concessions. Neither do Susan Rice, Power, or Jones. They're just wrong. And the pro-Israel right should point that out and explain it rather than wallowing in fantasies of victimization.
But - for their part - liberals like Peretz and Wexler should also to do some admitting. That they seemingly can't - that they end up defending what they shouldn't be defending - is at least partly a result of their electioneering. The unblinking denial and dishonest tactics that they used to sell Obama to the Jewish community apparently put them so far behind that they can't afford to yield even an inch. So any time someone criticizes Obama's appointments they have to pile on new and even dumber arguments. Which is how Peretz ends up having to defend Susan Rice on the "high standard of evidence" that he disagrees with her and having to explain that Samantha Power merely wants to invade Israel out of love.
References:
* Marty Peretz: Samantha Power Only Wants To Invade Israel Because She Loves It So Much [MR]
* Samantha Power Is a Friend of Israel [The Spine]
* Obama Foreign Policy Appointees: Israel To Blame For Mideast Instability, Sweeping Concessions Necessary [MR]
* MSM Startled That "Post-Partisan" "No-Drama" Candidate Choose Well-Noted Partisan Attack Dog As Chief Of Staff (Plus: Emanuel's Pro-Israel Influence Somewhat Underwhelming) [MR]
* Public Diplomacy Means Always Having to Say You're Sorry [MR]
* The Promise of Democratic Peace [Rice / WaPo]
* Rice: Failure Of Peace Process Is Israel's Fault (Plus: The Two Dogmas Of Foreign Policy Faux Sophistication) [MR]
* State Department Strategy Of Shielding Hezbollah During Lebanon II Working Out Great As Presidential Elections Postponed Again [MR]
* Fear Of Iran Triggers Biggest Middle East Arms Race Ever [MR]
* Bush: Actually, Not So Much With The Peace Process Thing This Year [MR]
* The Denial of the Obvious By Reference to the Irrelevant: Center-Left Foreign Policy and Democratic Politics [MR]
* What Is the Arab World's Problem? [Lee Smith / Slate]
* Obama Defenders: What Brzezinski Guy? (Plus: That's Not Even Their Worst Argument) [MR]
* New Leftist Meme: Palin "Solved Jewish Problem" That Obama Never Really Had (Plus: Anti-Palin "Buchanan Endorsement" Meme Also A Lie) [MR]
Previously:
* Obama's Going To Give His Big Speech In Indonesia? Really?
* Iran: No Seriously, We're Not Going To Talk To Obama Unless He Capitulates First
* Brzezinski: Israeli Campaign Against Iran Will Detonate US-Israel Relations
