In the weeks leading up to the relocation of the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem,
supporters of the Trump administration argued that his decision
exemplifies "America First" foreign policy, and that previous
administrations - going back to the time of Harry Truman - subordinated
U.S. interests for the sake of internationalism, by not recognizing
Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
While
as the executive director of a Christian peacemaking organization,
Churches for Middle East Peace, I am no proponent of an America First
foreign policy, this argument is deeply flawed.
Recognizing
Jerusalem as the unilateral capital of Israel, while ignoring the
presence and aspirations of more than 300,000 Palestinian residents of
Jerusalem, the ties of more than two and a half million Palestinians in
the West Bank, and the millions of diaspora Palestinians around the
world, is not in America’s national interest.
U.S. Vice
President Mike Pence stands by as U.S. President Donald Trump signs a
proclamation recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel during an
address from the White House in Washington on DeceKevin Lamarque
An
"America First" foreign policy in the Middle East must surely rely on
the close cooperation of our regional allies. Our allies in the region
not only include Israel, but nations that deeply sympathize with the
plight of the Palestinians and their struggle for self-determination. An
unabashedly unilateral approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict
compromises our relations with Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the GCC
nations and Turkey.
I
assert that it is never in the best interests of the United States to
pursue policies that will exacerbate tensions between Israel and the
Islamic world.
Seventy years of U.S. foreign policy have
painstakingly attempted to maintain this delicate coalition, and to
characterize this policy as subordinating American interests to
internationalism, compromise, and multilateralism vastly misjudges the
complexities of conducting foreign policy in this region.
As
a Christian peace advocate, I fervently hope that the U.S. will broaden
its foreign policy objectives beyond pure self-interest and take into
account the wellbeing of all peoples around the globe.
But
even the most self-interested of foreign policy makers can clearly see
how the decision to unilaterally recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital
will prove detrimental to U.S. interests.
William Rogers, Secretary of State during the
Nixon administration - whose foreign policy was the epitome of "America
First" realpolitik - wrote in 1969: "Our policy is and will continue to
be a balanced one. We have friendly ties with both Arabs and
Israelis.Therefore, our policy is to encourage the Arabs to accept a
permanent peace based on a binding agreement and to urge the Israelis to
withdraw from occupied territory when their territorial integrity is
assured as envisaged by the Security Council Resolution."
Withdrawing from occupied territory, as envisioned by the UN Security
Council, includes East Jerusalem. Nixon’s policy of U.S. support for a
peace based on Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories came
from an administration that can hardly be characterized as "subservient
to internationalism."
This
is not to say that the Jewish residents of Jerusalem and Israel do not
have unique ties to the city, historically, religiously, and
politically. I in no way oppose Israeli aspirations to see West
Jerusalem serve as their capital.
But when the United States recognizes the claims
of Israel without any regard for the claims of the Palestinians, the
message we send as a nation is that we see no political profit in a
negotiated resolution to this conflict. That is a very dangerous message
to send in the current political climate of the Middle East.
Writing-off
such warnings as the baseless hand wringing of an "Arabophile" State
Department, as many of this administration’s defenders have, completely
ignores the connection between U.S. foreign policy, anti-American
sentiment, and its ultimate consequence - radicalization.
Lives do indeed hang in the balance with this decision: Palestinian lives, Israeli lives - and yes - even American lives.
Rev.
Dr. Mae Elise Cannon is the Executive Director at Churches for Middle
East Peace (CMEP), a coalition of 27 Church denominations working to
encourage U.S. policies promoting Israeli-Palestinian peace. She is an
ordained pastor in the Evangelical Covenant Church.
Haneen Zoabi è la prima donna palestinese eletta al Parlamento israeliano in un partito – il Balad – che rappresenta la minoranza araba in Israele. In una lunga intervista racconta le ragioni del suo impegno politico all’interno di un sistema che la discrimina. In prima linea, per "smascherare le ipocrisie del potere". Israele. L'araba "cattiva" che siede alla Knesset di Cecilia Dalla Negra e Stefano Nanni La sua presenza nel Parlamento israeliano non è mai stata particolarmente gradita. Leggi, misure discriminatorie, attacchi diretti e minacce hanno caratterizzato la quotidianità del suo impegno politico all’interno di quella che lei chiama ‘la presunta macchina democratica dello Stato di Israele”. Un sasso nella scarpa del sistema: lei, che come prima donna palestinese con cittadinanza israeliana eletta alla Knesset mette in discussione dall’interno una struttura "solo all’apparenza democratica", perché il contenuto che ...
IDF cadets attend a ceremony at Auschwitz. Photo by AP Sintesi personale Haaretz Editoriale | 8 set 2013 | 03:43 | 4 By David Landau | 17 settembre 2013 | 03:10 | Il volo delle forze aree israeliane sopra il campo di sterminio di Auschwitz- Birkenau di 10 anni fa è stato un evento significativo .Il Maggiore Generale Amir Eshel conserva la documentazione nel suo ufficio ( Ari Shavit , Haaretz Magazine , 4 settembre ) . Non è stata una operazione semplice , tra l'altro a causa dell' opposizione del governo polacco ad autorizzare che aerei da guerra israeliani sorvolassero il suo spazio aereo . Alti ufficiali hanno testimoniato che questo evento costituiva una dimostrazione della forza israeliana là dove la tragedia ebraica era avvenuta 60 anni prima, quando nessun aereo internazionale soccorse i massacrati . Il grande valore ch...
1 1 settembre 2003 Sintesi personale Subito dopo gli attacchi dell'11 settembre 2001, i palestinesi avevano ogni ragione di temere che sarebbero i grandi perdenti Il giorno degli attacchi i canali americani ripetevano costantemente i filmati di un piccolo gruppo di palestinesi che festeggiava . I sostenitori israeliani hanno cercato di dimostrare con queste immagini che i palestinesi erano un popolo barbaro e nemico degli Stati Uniti e di Israele. Per i palestinesi, che hanno naturalmente condiviso l'orrore del resto del mondo, è stato un momento particolarmente difficile e molti temevano che ,dopo le migliaia di persone uccise negli attacchi, sarebbero stati loro le "seconde vittime" dell'11 settembre. Anche se i peggiori timori dei palestinesi non si sono realizzati, il governo del primo ministro israeliano Ariel Sharon non ha perso tempo per sfruttare le atrocità di New Yo...
An onslaught of exaggerated, sometimes wholly baseless, accusations of antisemitism has proved brutally effective The UK Labour Party’s shadow education secretary, Rebecca Long-Bailey , was recently sacked after sharing an article on social media saying - among other things - that Israel had trained US police in the knee-on-neck choking method used on George Floyd. This claim has been circulated widely in recent weeks among the global left. Labour leader Keir Starmer accused Long-Bailey of posting an article containing an “antisemitic conspiracy theory”. Evidently, the winds of change have come to Labour after Jeremy Corbyn stepped down - and the change does not portend well. Daring to blame Israel Middle East Eye on 25 June published details of the controversial article, with fact-checking. The accusation that it was from Israel that US police learned the choking method that led to Floyd’s death is unfounded. Police...
Commenti
Posta un commento