Peter K. <peterk at enteract.com>
Objects to my proposition that the US
>>establishment itself would no more see Israel defeated than
>>they would see New York defeated. It is morally an extension of the
>>US. The US elite could never bend to it,
>>without harming themselves.
Peter writes:
"Try as I might, I really can't follow this line of argument. It's as if some cognitive dissonance - not on my part I hope - is in effect."
Well, without wishing to be rude, yes I think the misunderstanding is Peter's not mine. He continues:
"Milosevic is a war criminal. Sharon is a war criminal."
I'm sorry, but as commonsensical as this sounds, it only demonstrates what a poor basis for an argument common sense is. You could find any number of people to disagree with the second or the first proposition. More importantly, the communities likely to assent to both - either radical leftists, or muslims - are characterised by their lack of influence in the courts of international justice.
Peter continues
"Their [Milosevic and Sharon's] victims didn't find their actions very formalistic."
No indeed. But the comparison between these actions is formalistic, or simply emotive. Yes, you will say that all suffering is suffering after all. Sadly questions of international relations are not decided by Jesus Christ, but by self-interested nations with distinct interests.
The difference is that Sharon's army is funded and armed by the dominant world power, and encouraged at every step in its campaign against Palestinian fighters. Milosevic, by contrast, was despised in the West, and denounced as a neo-Nazi by every Western media outlet. Those differences are not a matter of indifference, or chance, but a reflection of a balance of power.
"I sense an aporia in the anti-US-at-all-costs left argument."
I sense an aporia in the belief that the American (or British) state can be made into a vehicle for progressive change. How many times does that pious wish have to be disproved until one takes notice of the empirical evidence that the US establishment is not interested in making things better for Palestinians, the Arab world, Africans, East Asians and East Europeans?
"Israel is NOT morally an extension of the US however hard the ultraleft and the Israeli and American right argue it is"
How many times do you have to see American governments pay for, sanction and support Israeli actions against Palestinians and other Arabs, before you recognise a common interest?
'The US is "bending" to international pressure as I type, demanding that the IDF pull out "immediately" and they have already started.'
This wish has already been dashed. Rather than seeing the US in conflict with Israel, you should see it as a division of labour. George Bush does not want to be associated with the specific actions the IDF undertakes. But Powell's leisurely tour of European and Arab capitals has left Sharon quite enough time to do whatever he wants. So far 140 dead (as reported in today's Daily Telegraph) on the Palestinian side. Are they to thank Mr Powell when he finally turns up?
'Seems sort of "Rambouilletish".' Hardly.
-- James Heartfield The 'Death of the Subject' Explained is available at GBP11.00, plus GBP1.00 p&p from Publications, audacity.org, 8 College Close, Hackney, London, E9 6ER. Make cheques payable to 'Audacity Ltd'