Monday, March 19, 2007

Vigorously opportunistic

I had posted this in the middle of something a couple of days ago. This is, as they say, revised and expanded.
I've seen occasional articles lately asking why we continue to have virtually automatic support for Israel in this country, and pointing how the Israel lobby has a disproportionately strong impact on politics -- matched only by the NRA; if the Israeli lobbyists showed up armed, I imagine Congress would just roll over and wait for its belly to be scratched.  Seriously, though, I wonder the same thing.   They seem to delight in provocative actions that infuriate their neighbors (granted, no bastions of cool reason either, but still...); when they do have a rapprochment, its brief, and ends with some kind of statement absolving themselves of any blame. I can understand a little bit of this attitude -- our involvement in the creation of that country, plus they aren't actively hostile towards this country, unlike others in that region -- but it seems to me we need to rethink our default attitude. They need to prove themselves, or be treated less favorably.  At the very least, we shouldn't assume that in any conflict, they are always right. 

It probably wouldn't hurt to rethink our general attitude towards Arab countries, either. They're nowhere close to perfect, by our standards, as has been shown multiple times, but perhaps they deserve more than they get from us now. Is it possible to treat them honorably without giving away the farm?

I think that part of what makes that environment so difficult to handle is that virtually anyone can destablize it, and no one seems to regard their committments as binding. As to the former, I think of it as what we'd get in this country if the NRA had its way -- everyone's armed, and everyone can express their displeasure with anything in a lethal fashion. The latter reminds me of a description of Klingon motivational styles that I found in a Star Trek novel, to the effect that they are not untrustworthy, just vigorously opportunistic. They will adhere to their agrreements -- until the situation changes in their favor. Now, thats too glib for the real world, but there seems to be an element of it in play here -- as shown by the shootings done just recently by the organization that said it was honoring a truce -- until it wasn't. Until its possible to force an organization to honor its committments -- even if that simply means announcing when its going to ignore those committments -- I don't think we can trust anything that anyone there says. We have to treat them according to what they do, not what they say.

If we can't stop them, should we backing the people with more of what we want? Or should we withdraw entirely and say 'you're on your own', knowing full well what that will likely mean?

5 comments:

African Kelli said...

Fundamentally I think we support Israel because it is the birthplace of Christ. And while we don't discuss it often, we are a predominantly Christian nation. We want the best for the homeland. We want peace.
Just my take!

Cerulean Bill said...

It's interesting that you should put it that way. I told my wife once that I think of this as primarily a Christian nation, and she said she strongly doubted it. One time, perhaps; not now.

As for that being the homeland -- well, the Fertile Crescent is what I think of when that concept comes to mind, but to tell the truth, I'm not sure if all of humanity started there. And certainly there are major religions that don't find their basis there.

I wish I could agree with you, though. Thanks for your input -- it's valued.

Narie said...

I've actually read alot on this subject and I personally believe Christianity has almost everything to do with it. Not really because it's the birthplace of Christ, but biblical prophecy and the second coming cannot happen without Israel. Specifically, Israel being it's own state is a fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

While Christians in the US have dwindled certainly, they still are the dominant religion in this country. Evangelicals in particular are a force to be reckoned with and have a pretty good stranglehold in politics and with Republicans in particular.

Here's a link I think explains it better than I do and some of the numbers quoted towards the middle will give you a good idea of how strong a force this is in our country:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5193092.stm

Not that it matters, but I'm about as athiest as you can get, but I find religion itself an interesting institution to read about, both historically and currently. My sister however, is an evangelical. Fun times at the dinner table!

Cerulean Bill said...

Let me guess, Narie: when you two eat together, you try to stick to soup, so as to have no opportunities for choking, right?

I will look at that link, thanks. I do think that Christianity is a strong force in this country. Where I have a concern, its that there are Christians who think that they are the only religious force to be reckoned with == what are the Buddhists, Muslims, and all their brethren, chopped liver? == let alone that some of them are as fiercely iconoclastic and rigid as the most intense Muslim or Jew. I don't have a problem with that until it tries to remake the image of this country in its own image -- such as has happened to some extent under the Bush administration, and more was planned. Its when that happens that I want to do my mite to keep them away from the levers of power.

Cerulean Bill said...

I looked at that page. You're right, it's interesting. I was also taken by the small ancillary headline in the upper right corner, under 'See Also'. They didn't use the word 'stranglehold' exactly...