I’m feeling something akin to parental pride. One of my Columbia students, Seth Anziska, has published an excellent opinion article at Foreign Policy’s new Middle East Channel:
Reactions to the recent diplomatic squabble between the U.S. and Israel over building in East Jerusalem display a startling lack of historical memory. More than 30 years ago, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin insisted on building beyond the green line, and President Jimmy Carter proved unable to stop him. President Barack Obama risks a repeat performance. With the Netanyahu government’s announcement to build 1,600 more housing units in Ramat Shlomo, the consequences of U.S. inaction will prove even more damaging than in Carter’s time. Given a shift in American priorities, Obama can’t afford to stand down.
Back in 1977, Carter recognized that a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was central to broader regional peace. He got to work immediately upon taking office. Yet two days after his initial meeting with Begin, Carter was astonished to hear that the Israeli prime minister had returned home and legalized three West Bank settlements, declaring them “permanent.” …
Ultimately, Carter failed to prevent Begin’s expansionist excesses… Since Carter’s clash with Begin, settlements have only grown in number and size, undermining the very possibility of a two-state solution to end the conflict.
Today, a number of Israel’s supporters on Capitol Hill are voicing dismay at an increasingly vocal confrontation between two close allies over the issue. Sen. Joseph Lieberman called Obama’s angry reaction to the East Jerusalem plans “unnecessary” and “destructive of our shared national interest.”
But these objections seem anachronistic at best. Lieberman may not recognize a new reality on the ground, but President Obama certainly does. …
Today, a number of Israel’s supporters on Capitol Hill are voicing dismay at an increasingly vocal confrontation between two close allies over the issue. Sen. Joseph Lieberman called Obama’s angry reaction to the East Jerusalem plans “unnecessary” and “destructive of our shared national interest.”
But these objections seem anachronistic at best. Lieberman may not recognize a new reality on the ground, but President Obama certainly does. …
Read the rest here, while I go back to shepping nachas.