The beginning of the end for Robert Gates? (1 Viewer)

blackadder

...from a chicken, bugwit
VIP Contributor
Joined
Nov 8, 2003
Messages
31,293
Reaction score
25,110
Offline
Gates expected to push Israel-Palestinian talks
By MATTHEW E. BERGER
WASHINGTON

The nomination of Robert Gates as the next US secretary of defense was met in the US with restrained optimism that new blood would be able to bring different ideas to the Middle East.

But at the same time, supporters of Israel were quietly raising concerns that Gates's associations with members of President George H. W. Bush's foreign policy team would reignite calls for active US engagement towards the end of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378367462&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

As I suspected Gates is on board with James Baker. Baker and Bush 41 are the only American politicians that ever tried to make a move to pressure the Israelis into stopping the settlement of the occupied West Bank. These guys apparently get that solving this problem is the only hope for settling the region in the long run.

You can expect to see a concerted effort from the AIPAC/JINSA/Weekly Standard axis to undermine any efforts to address the Arab-Israeli conflict.

When the confirmation process for Gates begins you should expect to see some serious reservations about his qualifications and his record at the CIA to begin appaering from the usual Neocon mouthpieces.

The Neocon spin machine will now turn against this appointment, unless Gates sells out behind the scenes.
 
Last edited:
I'm not the political junkie you are, but I think Cheney and the neocons just got moved from the penthouse to the outhouse. I don't think they hold much sway anymore.

Then again, maybe Bush is just stubborn enough to stick with them.
 
I'm not the political junkie you are, but I think Cheney and the neocons just got moved from the penthouse to the outhouse. I don't think they hold much sway anymore.

Then again, maybe Bush is just stubborn enough to stick with them.

I hope that is the case.

I am referring more to the Neocon pundits/cheerleaders/lobbyists here. The same people that cheered on the Iraq intervention.

They are all about diverting attention from the Arab-Israeli conflict and protecting complete freedom of action for Israel, not just to defend themslves but to colonize at will in the midst of Arabs. "Pay no attention to the man behind that curtain!"

But if Gates comes in, under the influence of James Baker, and hints that the new approach to the region will be to put a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict at the center, the Neocon spinmeisters will come out of the woodwork to undermine that approach.

From their perspective they are looking at this change and asking "what does this mean for Israel?" before they ask "what does this mean for America?"

A solution will mean that settlement stops and Israel gets defined permanent borders. That's not what the Israeli right wants...yet.

I'm skeptical that Baker will have much latitude in this area because Bush 43 seems to have swallowed gallons of the Likudnik kool-aid.
 
Last edited:
So some others seem to be taking a cue from the Gates appointment.

Italy calls on the U.S. to press Israel on Palestinian conflict

By Reuters

Italy's Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema called on the United States on Friday to refocus its foreign policy following midterm elections, saying it was time to stand up to Israeli hawks over the Palestinian conflict.

A staunch critic of the Iraq war, D'Alema said he did not expect a sudden shift in President George W. Bush's foreign policy following his party's defeat in mid-term elections.

But he called on Bush to press Israel, where he said the military was lashing out in Gaza to prove its might after failing to defeat Hezbollah in Lebanon.

"I'm referring to a government weakened from the Lebanon conflict, pressed by the right, with the accusation of not being determined enough in its military operation," he said.

He said the U.S. should make resolving the Palestinian conflict its priority.

"Until now, the Bush administration has always held that it was an issue that it couldn't touch because, in essence, it could not disturb Israel," D'Alema said

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/786438.html
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom