Martin Peretz, despite writing for the New Republic and being an unabashed Barack Obama supporter, is also a rock of support for Israel (I haven't figured out how to reconcile his love for Israel with his love for Obama). Here he writes a very effective debunking of the (at best) stunningly naive doubletalk written by Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times: http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_spine/archive/2008/07/26/love-or-tough-love-both-worthless-without-understanding-nicholas-kristof-actually-understands-nothing-about-israel-or-the-palestinians.aspx. As Peretz notes, Kristof's thesis (that the U.S. must show Israel "tough love", i.e., that it must force Israel to give up everything to the Palestinians while they in turn give up nothing by empty promises) is based on historical ignorance and/or a completely misguided understanding of what Israelis and Palestinians really want.
Then again, Kristof writes for the New York Times, so why should we in any way be surprised?
1 comment:
The Seattle PI published Kristol's op-ed. Check out the comments that follow the article:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/soundoff/comment.asp?articleID=372024
Post a Comment