[Newsbot]

Filibuster Cartoons
Title: Bibi and Biden (click to view)
Date: March 14, 2010
Another case where mocking reality requires very little exaggeration.

Vice President Joe Biden was in the Middle East this week, visiting with Israel's hardline Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to give him a ritualistic American push towards reconciliation with the Palestinians.

As we all know, a huge sticking issue in this whole mess has been the matter of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories. Hardcore Jewish nationalist-types believe it's their right to continue to settle and populate arab territories in the name of zionism, while everyone in the peace-making community, including, supposedly, the Government of Israel, says such actions show no respect for Palestinian sovereignty, and thus undermine the eventual emergence of a Palestinian state.

Since he came to power, however, it's been an open question as to whether or not Prime Minister Netanyahu would make any serious attempt to reign in settlers, since his entire political career has been about contesting the very idea of an independent Palestinian state.

Still, people thought he'd at least have a bit more tact than to announce the construction of 1,600 new Israeli settlements in the Palestinian region of East Jerusalem during the Vice President's visit.

Of course, Bibi has since tried to shield himself from the diplomatic fallout, in part by claiming that his interior ministry, who were in charge of the settlement initiative, is full of ultra-zionist crazies with no respect for protocol. But he didn't apologize for the settlement plan itself, nor attempt to justify placing crazies in charge of the interior ministry in the first place.

[Ombrageux]

Good comic.

The thing wouldn't be so hypocritical if the U.S. government's pious statements on Israeli expansion were accompanied by actually using its leverage to restrain Israel.

One could have a similar comic: Israeli PM bulldozes/builds in West Bank, US President condemns hand-on-heart, US president serendipitously gives $3 billion in weapons to said Israeli PM.

[GreenTiger]

Biden is so IsaeliWhipped Bibi could piss on Air Force One and Obama/Biden would come up "good reason" why he did that.

[Zipperfish]

The US government has very little sway with Israel. Israel has always gone ahead and done and served their own interests as they see fit. The US is forced to play along for a number of reasons--first off they have a strong geopolitical interest in the area, and secondly they've got a powerful Zionist and fundamentalist Christian lobby in the US.

As for the "peace process"--well really I can't help but laugh every time I see those words. There's no peace process there and hasn't ever been, in my opinion. If the two antagonists put as much effort into trying to live with each other as they put into trying spin their propaganda in the world's media, they'd be a lot further along by now.

I thought it was quite nice that Obama was just ignoring the whole thing for a while--probably the biggest favour the US could do for the so-called "peace process." But for some reason he decided to send Biden, and now he has a harsh reminder as to why that's a big waste of time.

[CKASlacker]

<sigh> and so the Israeli/Palestinian woes ramble on. It's difficult to see a resolution without some sort of fundamental change in thinking on both sides. Sadly, this may only happen when both average Palestinians and Israelis *demand* peace because they're tired of living in fear of reprisal from the *other* side.

Until both sides lose the attitude of "your grandfather killed my grandfather, so I'm going to kill you", future violence will always be justified by some event in the past.

I can't help but be reminded of Northern Ireland in the time of the "Troubles". I recall that the folk who actually lived in the Republic being very much sick of the whole issue (this was circa 1998) and craving peace. It was speculated that much of the IRA's funding came from overseas ex-pats for the "glory of the revolution" (to quote U2). This is pure speculation, but I can't help but think there are parallels to the pro-Zionists from abroad (US mostly) doing the same here... although to be fair, I doubt the Israeli government relies on much of their funding like the IRA did.

P.S. I've apparently been living under a rock and actually had no idea Filibuster was back until recently -- thanks JJ!

[Kjorteo]

Off-topic, but I really like the way you drew Vice President Biden.

[JJ]

Thanks. I think I got a "symbol" down for him now.

[redduck85]

Since the issue has been chewed out by Pundits from the 4 corners of the world, most of whom are unfortunately completely clueless, including the author of this comic (I am an old fan of Filibuster Cartoons!) I will give my two cents:

The issue must be looked at from the perspective of Israeli law and Israeli domestic politics in order to be understood.

First of all it should be noted that any construction in Jerusalem is NOT a settlement! Unlike Judea and Samaria, which are under military occupation, Jerusalem has been properly annexed under an Israeli Basic Law (Similar to a constitutional amendment in the US). Constructing settlements in military occupied zones requires the approval of the Israeli Security Cabinet, which usually includes the Prime Minister, Defense Minister and Foreign Minister (i.e. the consensus of the top political brass of the State, who are by the way, rarely from the same political convictions!). Construction in Jerusalem at most requires the approval of some Parliamentary subcommittee for Housing and of some bureaucratic red tape that occurs strictly within the confines of the Ministry of Housing and Development. Any interference by the top political brass in construction of Housing within the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem is against the law of the land and at best can only halt development until the Supreme Court tells them to stop. The only way this can be changed is by amending or repealing an Israeli basic law (requires a 2/3 absolute majority in 4 votes).

The ministry responsible for this announcement is currently held by Shas, which has been wrongly portrayed in the Western Media as right wing... Shas is a party that catres to the community of Poor religious folk who are usually descendants of Jewish refugees from Arab countries. They are a mix of conservative moral values, populist socialist welfare policy and political prostitution . They supported the Oslo accord for example. They usually don't interfere with foreign policy and the ministry's concern is rather to provide more housing to the religious poor, it's power base.

And last point, Israeli Real Estate law is extremely convoluted... it requires many steps from complex zoning by-laws on the municipal levels to agreements of several departments within the ministry of housing, to complex bidding regulations and so on... each one of those steps can be counted as 'approval of construction'. In this story it was step 4 of 7 or 5 of 10, there isn't even a consensus about that

So basically, this is an extension of an existing neighborhood, the PM doesn't have much of a say (or even knowledge) about what's going on. The area in question falls outside of the current settlement freeze (which was agreed upon with the American administration previously.

JJ, do you expect PM Harper to be accountable to every subdivision which is constructed in Port Coquitlam or Laval?

If the Municipality of Vancouver announced that a new subdivision would be called 'Long Live Free Tibet' During a state visit of Hou Jintao, what could Mr. Harper do about it except for attempting to twist a few arms in shady deals behind the scenes? assuming he gets a warning.

Hope this adds a bit of clarity to this highly complex issue!

[redduck85]

I apologize if my post was a little messy, I wrote it in a jiffy

[redduck85]

Jenn,

Obviously you did not really pay attention to what I am saying.

In Israel there is a form of constitutional law. And Jerusalem falls under this law whether you like it or not.

The fact is that according to Israeli constitutional law any construction within the municipal confines of Jerusalem is NOT the same as construction in a settlement (which falls under the jurisdiction of the military's Civilian Authority, the body that was also responsible for social/public services before the PA existed).

Israeli Real Estate law is convoluted in Israel... in the West Bank in Israeli administrated areas the Real Estate law is very simple! It falls under one Jurisdiction!

Infact approving a new subdivision in Jerusalem (east or west) or Tel Aviv can take much longer than constructing an entirely new settlements in Areas C of the West Bank.

As for extension of neighborhoods... I am sorry but the issue in question is a construction of a new subdivision within an existing Jewish neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo. This is the simple fact of this specific case.

If you want to discuss the issue at large, I will remind you that the only reason you consider the West Bank to be non-Jewish land is because it was ethnically cleansed (including the old city of Jerusalem) of Jews systematically in the decades leading to 48.

As for 'stealing' land. The territory was Jordanian... there was never a sovereign Arab/Muslim Palestinian state. Israel has been actively working to create one.

[JJ]

You know, I don't think it really needs to be this complicated.

The issue, as I see it was this:
1) As part of a US-lead peace plan, the US tells Israel not to do something.
2) Israel does it, and does not apologize for it.
3) US reacts negatively.

The pro-Israeli people seem to have a very hard time accepting the premise that the US Government EVER has a right to criticize the Israeli government for anything substantial, or demand any degree of accountability from them. I think the Netanyahu government is very clearly a blockade to any sort of meaningful peace process at the moment, just as there have been many situations in which the Palestinian leaders have been roadblocks. Especially considering how far-right Netanyahu's agenda is, I really don't understand why more moderate liberal Jews can't just support Obama and say, "yes, Israel is the problem at the moment."

I used to be more sympathetic to the Jewish side, but I am becoming increasingly sick of the way every single criticism of Israel has to turn into this huge defensive existential debate about history and law and geography and policy and all the rest. It's very tiring, and it's not very mature. Sometimes being the bigger man requires putting some ego issues aside and admitting problems.

[Ombrageux]

redduck85 - You're a total waste of time. Try not to be completely disingenuous and use a little bit of common sense/empathy.

[commanderkai]

Ombrageux wrote:

redduck85 - You're a total waste of time. Try not to be completely disingenuous and use a little bit of common sense/empathy.

Actually, he does have a point. To Israel, the whole of Jerusalem is theirs, as such, building settlements within the "region" of East Jerusalem is not an issue for Israel or her populace. Maybe the perspective of the Israeli populace should be more factored in, especially their frustration over the various peace processes of the past, from the Gaza pullout to the Oslo Accords, to their dealings with neighboring states.

But yes, not having overwhelming amounts of sympathy for the "plight" of the Palestinians means people lack common sense or empathy, or something. It's a tiring and a very old argument. No real progress will be made in dealing with either side if you're not willing to understand the views of your opponents.

Edit: Might as well add a bit more to this. I assume by showing empathy, you mean with dealing with the Palestinian desire to gain an independent state, correct? I am sympathetic to the average, non-radical, and sadly silenced Palestinian who desires nothing more than peace with Israel, while living within their own state. Some of these Palestinians, like the many who willingly work within Israel to provide for their families, might even desire a sort of normalcy between Israelis and the Palestinians. Now, I certainly can't read your mind, but I'd hope that you think the Israelis want peace and security from potential terrorism. If you believe otherwise, please do tell.

Either way, understanding what the Palestinians want, or rather, the silenced Palestinians, is rather simple due to their portrayal in the West. The desire for an independent state is a view that many Westerners can appeal to, due to the histories of various Western states (the United States fighting the Revolutionary War, Germany reuniting after the Cold War, Canada's gradual move towards independence, etc). The silenced Palestinians, however, do not counter the views of the more aggressive and dangerous groups, like Hamas and Hezbollah (and Fatah can also be argued to be in this camp too), who desire the destruction of Israel as a whole, and Jews as a people.

Understanding the desires of Israelis is more complicated due to their desires of security, specifically. The Golan Heights, and formerly the Sinai, were buffers between Israel and likely enemies. However, in securing themselves, they alienated some Western liberals. Same goes with what Israel would consider its territory (East Jerusalem, but also some of the disputed lands over the Israeli security barrier), viewing those territories as essential to the state of Israel. The views of BOTH sides needs to be further understood before any attempt at peace can be accomplished.