Amos's River of Justice

Tag: Joe Biden

  • Why No one Denies Anything to Netanyahu

    Why No One Denies Anything to Netanyahu
    Dolphin-class Submarine

    In a Neutrality Studies interview, Professor Dr. Dr. H.C. Wolfgang Streeck explains why no one denies anything to Netanyahu. They fear he might use nuclear weapons on his neighbors. This interview was based on an article Dr. Streeck wrote on this subject in December of 2023.

    If Streeck is correct, this explains President Biden’s unwavering support of Israel’s brutality during an election year. It also suggests why Biden’s support of Israel is not unique among American leaders, including Donald Trump. Nor is it unique to the United States. Aside from South Africa no government has done anything to stop Netanyahu.

    None of this is Biden’s fault. It’s not even the fault of the United States. That might sound strange. Lately, everything seems like the fault of the United States. But the most likely culprits have escaped notice. The United States did not create the overarching threat of nuclear weapons in Israeli hands. France was the first country to supply Israel with the ability to make nuclear weapons. Germany has contributed to Israel’s expansion and nuclear arsenal since World War II. The Israelis now have a ‘tripod’, which means submarines, missiles, and fighter jets. Their huge fleet of fighter planes is capable of going to Tehran and back without refueling, and while carrying a nuclear payload. And their Dolphin-class submarines are capable of being fitted with nuclear warheads.

    The nuclear arsenal of Israel is not just playing a part in the strategic decisions of Israel, but in the behavior of its neighbors. It is estimated that Israel has about 400 nuclear warheads of different kinds. By some estmates, Israel has the most technologically sophisticated nuclear arsenal, just behind or on par with the US.

    And it gets worse. The Israelis haven’t admitted they have nuclear weapons. This means there are no inspections and no formal nuclear policies. That’s serious enough, but when you consider that Israel’s neighbors in the the Middle East don’t have nuclear weapons at all, you begin to understand why Netanyahu feels so free to butcher the Palestinians. Israel’s neighbors in the Middle East offer no deterrence to Israel’s nuclear arsenal.

    How did this happen? France’s contribution took place before the Unite States entered the world stage. Germany’s contributions have been taking place since World War II. After the war the Germans were being supervised by the United States. However, they did some things on their own initiative.

    Streeck blames Germany’s courting of Israel on an absence of an identity, its dependence on the United States, and its pariah status. For these reasons, the Germans thought it was important to have some kind of good relations with Israel. After 1949, there was a conversation about reparations between Germany and Israel’s David Ben-Gurion. They discussed what Germany could do as compensation for the Holocaust. Ben-Gurion was quite clear that he needed support for expansion in Palestine, and Germany gave him that support. More recently, Germany has supplied Israel with six Dolphin-class submarines capable of being fitted with nuclear warheads. That’s how Streeck explains it anyway.

    I would put it this way: Germany made an alliance with Jews who happen to live in the most strategic location in the Middle East. Out of guilt. Never mind that every conqueror in the modern age has had designs on that place, incuding Hitler. But back to the interview.

    The fact that the Israeli government can pursue the strategy they are now pursuing has something to do with their confidence that if American public policy weakens US support, they have their own tools. So, there is a sort of intelligence feedback loop. The Americans are aware that if they don’t support Israeli policy in relation to Palestine, the Israelis will do it themselves. Then Israel might do things that are out of the control of the United States.

    I was worried before watching this interview by suggestions for electoral stategy in the US. There are journalists who say we can’t vote for Joe Biden because of his part in the genocide of Gaza. Some say outright that Trump is a better choice. It’s hard to explain these comments from reasonable people. We know that President Donald Trump helped Netanyahu’s reelection chances. He did this by recognizing Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heighs. Israel illegally seized the Golan Heights from Syria in 1967, and since then every American administration has considered it ‘occupied’ territory. But not Trump. Trump also moved the US embassy to Jerusalem against the wishes of the Palestinians. And, since October 7, candidate Trump has assured Israel of his support.

    I agree that the US should support Israel when it is attacked by Hamas, but electing an eratic character like Trump is not the solution. Trump is no more concerned about the Palestinians than Netanyahu.

    Another thing to consider is whether this attack on Gaza is part of a strategy to elect Trump. If Netanyahu prefers Trump to Biden, which I think he does, humiliating Biden would be a good way to help Trump. And if Streeck is right, there’s nothing Biden can do about it.

    If you’re waiting for my suggestion of who you should vote for, you may have missed the point of this article. I predict that Netanyahu will continue to pound the Palestinians until the election. And if that’s what he wants to do, no one will stop him.

  • The Return of Liberalism?

    The Meritocracy Versus Just America

    I recently watched George Packer talk about his new book, Last Best Hope.  I agree with most of what I heard in this interview (although there are hints that he is not an ally of progressives).  Parker is calling for the return of liberalism.  On the positive side, he thinks the goal for the country should be equal citizens governing themselves.  He stresses that he doesn’t define equality in the sense of equal outcome, but in the sense of no one being born and dying in a permanently subordinate class.  And when he says citizens should govern themselves, he means they should participate in the current democratic system.   My main concerns are the rivalry he sets up between liberalism and progressivism, and his belief that we actually have a self-governing system.

    The root of our problems, Packer says, is that we’ve been unable to make an equal America across race and class lines.  We have to create conditions of equality, mostly through government intervention, through breaking up monopolies, by empowering workers, by rebuilding the safety net, by making education more equal.

    I agree with all of these proposals.  However, I would argue that the attempt to achieve these goals has lead to the divisions he is trying to heal.  But Packer believes his policies would allow the temperature to go down so that people could work together again.

    Packer does mention progressives.  He credits Elizabeth Warren as the leader of progressives who want to rein in monopolies.  But progressives are not listed in his four divisions of America, and the category that would seem to include progressives is not invited to participate in the return of liberalism.  Below is Packer’s list of four rival Americas which have arisen since the 1970s:

    The four Americas are Free America; Real America; Smart America; and Just America.  Free America is conservative to the point of libertarianism.  Real America is Sarah Palin’s America, and the direct rival of Free America. Smart America is the professional class or meritocracy.  Smart America is separate from liberalism.  Just America is the chief critic of Smart America.  Packer does not think Just America has any benign attributes.  It is associated with social intolerance and cancel culture.

    According to Packer, Just America sees the United States as nothing but a caste system.  For this group everything about American history is white, and whiteness is on trial.  He illustrates this by citing Ta-Nehisi Coates’s statement that America is a unitary malignant force.  But Packer’s so-called illustration is misleading, because Coates has been criticized by progressives.

    Packer also claims that Just America’s focus on race makes them unwilling to talk about class.  What is needed, in his opinion, is two people of different races to spend several hours together in a room.  He seems unaware that Bernie Sanders and Killer Mike met together in just this way.

    Packer also criticizes Just America’s denial of black violence in black communities, as well as its support for defunding the police.  On the other hand, he speaks approvingly when he calls Black Lives Matter a movement for oppressed people.  This is a contradiction because Black Lives Matter is the most prominent voice for defunding the police.

    In case you are not convinced that Just America is on the firing line, I’ll share Packer’s summary of the four divisions of America:  Free America lauds the energy of the unencumbered individual; Smart America respects intelligence and welcomes change; Real America commits itself to a place and has a sense of limits; and Just America demands a confrontation with what the others want to avoid.

    The Return of Liberalism Needs the Left

    If the changes listed by Packer can be accomplished, I won’t object to the dismissal of the progressive movement.  But Packer’s false definition of the left makes success unlikely.  The accomplishments of progressives have to be acknowledged and appreciated and built upon if we’re going to achieve the equality George Packer is talking about.

    A Supporting View

    Packer’s misidentification of progressives is summed up by Eric Levitz in a June 15 article for Intelligencer.

    There are many problems with Packer’s essay.  For one, its characterization of Just America is a tendentious description of one ideological tendency in a single segment of the millennial left.  There are no small number of racial-justice advocates whose vision is unabashedly universalist…

    But an even bigger problem with Packer’s schema is this: It completely ignores the majority of Democratic voters who are neither professional-class meritocrats nor millennial anti-racists.  Packer hasn’t described the central division within Blue America but the generational cleavage within his own professional circle.

    The Return of Liberalism and Self-Governance

    Packer wants this country to remain self-governing.  I share his concern, but it’s important to acknowledge that the system needs improvement.  After all, it gave the presidency to Donald Trump in 2016 even though he had 4 million fewer votes than his opponent.  More importantly, it has silenced the voices of many generations who have tried to warn us about the climate crisis.  We need a system capable of being influenced by the voters, and we need voters who are willing to participate.  We can do a better job of self-governance.

    Tim Black on The Black Left

    Lynn Parramore on the Coup – and the corporations- That Destroyed the Black Middle Class

    Radical Universalism, on the Jacobin Show

    Zero Books: Identity Politics is Right Wing

    Gresham College: Food Oppression

    Bad Faith: What to do with Inconvenient Truths

    Glenn Greenwald: Canceling Comedians While the World Burns

  • Finding Joy in the Darkness

    Please see the update at the end of the article

    Considering the pressures that weigh down the inhabitants of Planet Earth this Christmas season, I think it is important to state the good news first rather than at the end of the article.  (My recommendations for a Russian movie, Stalker, and the Grace Cathedral version of Handel’s Messiah can be found at the end of this article.) The following may not be the good news you were hoping for, but it bodes well for the future: It has recently become apparent that our conversation is developing a recognizable character, substance and direction.  In these times when foundations seems to be crumbling, a new foundation has been forming itself right under our feet.

    I came to this realization after a disturbing conversation with a member of my local Democratic Party in which I discovered that she was completely unaware of the term ‘option for the poor’.  Participants in our conversation will have learned this term from Pope Francis–it is a term used in Catholic social teaching, and it means that “God invites us to care in a special way for those who need the most help.”

    As followers of Christ, we are challenged to make a preferential option for the poor, namely, to create conditions for marginalized voices to be heard, to defend the defenseless, and to assess lifestyles, policies and social institutions in terms of their impact on the poor.  The option for the poor does not mean pitting one group against another, but rather, it calls us to strengthen the whole community by assisting those who are most vulnerable.

    Her obliviousness to this key concept of the conversation was doubly disturbing considering that President-elect Joe Biden, a member of her own party, has been using this term in his speeches.  (Biden would have learned this term directly from Catholic social teaching.)

    In addition to his mention of a preferential option for the poor, President-elect Biden has appointed cabinet members that we can at least hope will be willing and able to manage our land and resources for the support of every American.

    For example, he has appointed Xavier Becerra as Secretary of Health and Human Services; Congresswoman Marcia Fudge as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; Deb Haaland as Interior Secretary; and Michael Regan as EPA Administrator.  Biden has also created a new cabinet role of Special Presidential Envoy for Climate Change, appointing John Kerry to this role.  We can discuss these nominees later, as well as others that are not as much to our liking, but in this season we can choose to focus on good news and that is what I want to do.

    Biden’s pick for Chair of Council of Economic Advisers, Cecilia Rouse, spoke in the language of the conversation when she said, “We need to be positioned for the economy of the future so that everyone is able to partake in the growth we hope to have.”  Biden’s pick for US Trade Representative, Katherine Tai, also spoke in the language of the conversation when she said, “[Trade] is a means to create more hope and opportunity for people…And it only succeeds when the humanity and dignity of every American–and of all people–lie at the heart of our approach.”

    In addition to the influence of Catholic social teaching, other crucial influences round out the conversation and give it life.  We have welcomed the wisdom of indigenous people in the fight to protect our resources.  Biden’s nomination of Deb Haaland as Interior Secretary is a clear nod to the importance of the Native American contribution to this effort.

    The conversation has also welcomed the influence of socialists and Marxists in our midst (although with some trepidation on my part, mostly due to the fear that it invites extremism in American politics.)   The socialists have patiently explained the necessity of economic theory going forward as well as the importance of the creation of wealth if we’re going to care for everyone in times of crisis.  For my part, I recognize the need for these knowledgable people who can think outside of the economic box.

    We are also grateful for the voices and activism of Black Lives Matter, and the attention that protesters around the world have brought to the problem of racism and police brutality.

    Of course, Bernie Sanders has been a huge influence in the conversation.  Although Sanders was considered a left-leaning candidate for the presidency this is only true by American standards.  All of his policy proposals have a solid place in American politics.

    We are also aware in this conversation of the importance of agricultural policy and the way it affects food and water security.  This has been a concern of Marcia Fudge, who lobbied for the position of Secretary of Agriculture.  She would have shifted the agency’s focus from farming toward hunger.  Agricultural policy is central to climate policy and job security as well as food security, so it is sure to be of interest to progressives in the years to come.

    For me, the realization of the centrality of agricultural policy in global conflicts was the most exhilarating realization of this conversation.  It is so important that it should have at least been acknowledged by the Democratic establishment in the 2016 election, but Biden may be making up for that omission.  It should motivate an immediate change, not only in domestic policy but in foreign policy as well.  It makes the Empire’s foreign adventures seem futile and ridiculous, and for that reason it inspires the imagination and the confidence to envision a new world.

    But this good news is only a beginning.  Americans who face hunger and eviction continue to suffer this Christmas season, so we ask the incoming Biden administration to make them a priority.

    I’ll finish by sharing a movie and Christmas music that I think you will enjoy.  Speaking of our strange times, there is a 1979 movie called Stalker.  Admittedly, you have to pay $3.99 to rent it and also have an Amazon Prime account.  (It may also be on Netflix, but I don’t have a Netflix account so I can’t say for sure.)  The movie is based on a novel by the Strugatsky brothers, Roadside Picnic, and directed by Andrei Tarkovsy.   According to Adam Curtis it was inspired by a sense of unreality in Soviet Russia.

    Those who are not interested in the movie might like this performance of Handel’s Messiah in Grace Cathedral.

    Or, the Hallelujah Chorus from Handel’s Messiah.

    Merry Christmas everyone.

    Update December 25: I believe that the following articles and videos have some bearing on the movie, Stalker, that I recommended at the end of this article, or some bearing on my article in general.

    The Infirmity of Jesus is a Teaching of Christmas

    The Light of Hope Shines Brightest in Darkness

    Twenty-five of the best films on Amazon Prime

    Reading the Hindu and Christian Classics: Why and How Deep Learning Still Matters

    Aruna Chetana

     

     

error: Content is protected !!