Skip to main content

Obama and Israel

I find it unsettling that people are apprehensive of Obama's foreign policy as it pertains to US-Israel relations. Many have declared Obama's willingness to negotiate with Iran as a lack of commitment to Israel. While I can understand Israeli/Jewish people's initial reservation to endorsing a man with a Muslim sounding name, I disagree with the idea that he will be any less of a friend of Israel. Here are my reasons for not fearing diplomacy and Obama.
  1. Diplomacy and negotiation rarely hurt. A policy of refusing to negotiate leads to dead ends in a world that desperately needs paths for peaceful resolutions. While Bush's commitment to Israel is very strong, it has appeared very blind and stupid to a fault. Most people would agree that Israel's security is worse off now than it was in 2000 mainly because Bush's Iraq policy has strengthened Iran which poses the greatest threat to Israel.
  2. It is ironic that while the Bush administration is busy not talking to Syria, Israel has gone ahead and started fairly promising negotiations with Syria.
  3. It is ironic that while the Bush administration largely dismisses diplomacy against terrorist nations (Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria), the one notable foreign policy success they had was achieved through diplomacy with North Korea.
Thomas L. Friedman's article articulates the relationship between Obama and the Jews much more intelligently. He also discusses an equally significant component of this equation which is the [im]balance of power, or the shift thereof. In a world transitioning from the one-superpower state of the last 20 years to a more diverse balance of power, cowboy diplomacy fails even more disastrously. That's why the diplomacy and negotiation Obama advocates is critical to the future of the US and the world. An America weakened and isolated due to bad foreign policy decisions will not be able to give Israel any sense of security.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Correlation Between Taxes and Social/Economic Programs

I have always wondered if the taxes people pay correlate with the availability of social and economic programs and safety nets, not to mention the military programs that protect them. This idea comes in light of the notion that Europeans are highly taxed compared to their American counterparts, but they seem to have access to free (or almost free) education and health care while the US provides neither. The Europeans live and work at a more leisurely pace than Americans and they have the comfort of knowing that their government has put safety nets in case a disaster. The Europeans do a lot to ensure that all their citizens have comparable opportunities, and thus you are less likely to see a huge gap between the poor and the rich. Perhaps the lack of incentive to excel has stifled entrepreneurship and innovation in Europe to some extent. In fact, Europe has historically high unemployment rates than the US and the size of government there is significantly larger than that of the US....
Post a Comment
Read more

Microsoft Gone Wild

NBC and Microsoft have formed an intricate partnership in which Microsoft serves to expand and maintain NBC's presence in the online news and entertainment market while promoting its products. NBC online integrates many of Microsoft's products. MSNBC is co-owned by GE's NBC universal and Microsoft. I have no problem with the partnership, except for the way Microsoft pushes people to use Microsoft products while other alternatives do just as well or better. Let me provide some examples. You can't access NBC online videos unless you have a Windows media plugin. What about using Flash like everybody else. If you want to access Olympics games online at NBC Olympics, you better be using a Windows or a Mac because Microsoft does not have a Linux version of the Silverlight plugin that it is pushing hard in competition with Adobe Flash, the industry standard. Suppose you are using Windows, you pay a huge penalty for not using Internet Explorer!! Try watching videos with In...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Pervasive Mac vs. Windows vs. Linux Analogy

I'm sure everyone has seen the Mac vs. PC ads on TV where the Mac appears to be confident while th PC is in denial about its deficiencies. Missing from that picture is Linux which is robust, but seeks no attention because it has no commercial ambitions. This Mac vs. PC vs. Linux model can serve as a analogy for many things/phenomena. I would like to make a list of those analogies here. For example, The New York Times recently characterized Hillary as a PC and Obama as a mac on the basis of the design of their websites. The analogy would also work if you think of Hillary as the status quo much like Windows, and Obama as the new thing with great promise, cachet and appeal like the newly reborn mac. It is not obvious who would play the role of Linux, but my choice would be Ron Paul. He has some bold and independent ideas along with a very loyal following even though he has no chance of winning. PC Mac Linux Candidate Hillary Clinton Barack Obama Ron Paul States Northeast West Co...
Post a Comment
Read more