THE REACTIONARY “ISRAELI POLICY FORUM”

By Felix Quigley

In previous articles we have looked at the way in which US, British and German Imperialism destroyed the sovereign state of Yugoslavia,  and we have showed the actual photographs of Serbs being murdered by Croatian “Ustasha” Nazis  led by Franjo Tudjman and the Bosnian Islamist Fascists led by Alija Izetbegovic in the 90s, in Europe. We also looked at the role of the American Jewish leaders in this genocide of the Serbs. Today I look more closely at one of these American Jewish  organizations.

MJ Rosenberg of a group called the “Israeli Policy Forum” seems a pretty impressive kind of guy.

He tells us himself on his site:

mj_rosenberg_02_small.jpg

M.J. Rosenberg is the Director of Policy Analysis for Israel Policy Forum (IPF), a position he has held since the spring of 1998.


In this position, MJ heads IPF’s Washington, D.C. office and writes IPF Friday, a weekly  opinion column on the Arab-Israeli conflict which is widely circulated throughout the United States and the Middle East. In addition, MJ has published numerous op-eds, in the national and Jewish press.
 
MJ spent eighteen years within the United States government, fourteen on Capitol Hill as an aide to Representatives Jonathan Bingham (D-New York), Edward Feighan (D-Ohio) and Nita Lowey (D-New York) and Senator Carl Levin (D-Michigan).  Immediately prior to coming to IPF, he was a political appointee to USAID, where he served as Chief of Staff for Thomas Dine, the head of the Eastern Europe/NIS Bureau of USAID.


From 1982 to 1986, MJ was editor of Near East Report, the American Israel Public Affair Committee’s (AIPAC’s) biweekly publication on Middle East Policy.

Before going into his present stance on Israel, let us seewhat he said about the Yugoslavia issue.

Writing in 2004 Rosenberg said:

[start quote here]

The Yugoslavian wars are over. Milosevic is on trial and the people of Serbia-Montenegro, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia, and even Kosovo are, at last, recovering from the wars he initiated. Amazingly, Sarajevo is slowly regaining the multi-ethnic character it had before Milosevic set out on the path to war.

[end quote here]

http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/3403.htm

Now that is interesting. It appears that Rosenberg represents the line of US Imperialism very closely. The article in which this appeared dealt with the great betrayal of Sharon in withdrawing from Gaza. This is what he wrote on that:

[start quote here]

The parallels with Israel and the Palestinians are obvious. Both Israelis and Palestinians are suffering as a result of the collapse of the peace process. Economic boom and growing prosperity has been replaced by severe economic decline. The number of victims of terrorism and violence on both sides has skyrocketed. A general hopelessness has replaced the soaring optimism of the years prior to the catastrophic failure to reach an agreement at Camp David.But there is some movement. Prime Minister Sharon has pledged to withdraw from Gaza and from parts of the West Bank.This could be very good news. But only if Sharon’s proposed unilateral moves are coordinated with the Palestinians. No warring party has ever made peace by itself. Look at the list above. Did any of these people end hostilities without consultation with the other side? Unilateralism, without coordination with Palestinians, can easily become just another means of sticking it to them.


That is why the Bush administration should step in and shape Sharon’s proposal in a way that ensures that “Gaza First” is not “Gaza Last” or “Gaza Only.” Rather than telling Sharon (as the media reports) that he should delay Gaza withdrawal until after our Presidential election, it should be encouraging him to move as swiftly as he can — but to do it in coordination with the Palestinians. The last thing Israel (or anybody else) needs in Gaza is a Hamas-run entity, firing rockets into Israel and instigating suicide bombings. The Palestinian Authority should be encouraged to help control the situation and Egypt and Saudi Arabia can be pushed to use their influence on Hamas to ensure that Gaza does not become an autonomous terror base.

Otherwise, Israel is simply throwing up its hands and leaving, without reciprocal actions from the other side and without concern over how Palestinians will be affected. Working with the Palestinians, a Gaza withdrawal (followed by substantial withdrawal from the West Bank) can be part of an Israeli-Palestinian solution. Going it alone, as if the Palestinians did not exist, will almost surely deepen the problem. The Bush Administration should view Sharon’s move as an opportunity to be seized, not a problem to be finessed.

[end quote here]

It seems therefore that Rosenberg believes that there is the Israeli claim to the Holy Land and there is the “Palestinian” claim to the Holy Land. He also believes that the claims of the Palestinian Arabs should be respected, meaning the setting up of an Arab Palestinian state. In what way then are the views of Rosenberg different from say “Counterpunch” of a few years ago?!

Rosenberg writes an opinion column weekly and his latest is number 361. On March 28 he writes this:

[begin quote here]

Vice President Cheney, for instance, said last week that a Palestinian state was “long overdue” and spoke about the need for “painful sacrifices” by Israelis and Palestinians to achieve it. But he also ruled out any change in U.S. policy toward Hamas. He insists that Hamas has to accept U.S. and Israeli demands before we accept its participation in a Palestinian unity government or a role in negotiations—demands Hamas has repeatedly rejected. How Cheney would achieve the “long overdue” establishment of a Palestinian state is a mystery.The good news is that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has apparently reached an agreement with President Abbas on the key issues dividing Israel and the Palestinian Authority, including refugees and Jerusalem. Israeli and Palestinian sources say that the agreement meets the security and political needs of both sides. Not surprisingly, the tentative agreement tracks the so-called Clinton parameters, the plan President Clinton proposed in 2001 as his term in office was ending. After eight years and much bloodshed, mainstream Israelis and Palestinians are ready for it.But they won’t have it unless the Palestinians establish a unity government, something the United States and Israel oppose. Both Washington and Jerusalem went out of their way this week to express indifference to the negotiations taking place in Yemen between the various Palestinian factions, indifference coupled with warnings to Abbas not to even think about a Palestinian unity government. By himself, however, Abbas cannot deliver the Palestinians—not when Gaza is under Hamas control. And Israelis won’t make the “painful sacrifices” Cheney alluded to unless they know that an agreement—whether on a cease-fire or on final status issues—is binding on Hamas as well as on Fatah.
For an agreement to work, all the relevant parties have to be included—not just the ones we think are lovely people. The problem with the Gaza withdrawal of 2005 was that it was unilateral. The Palestinians made no commitments when Israel left because they weren’t even consulted on the leaving. This is absurd. That is why Olmert and Abbas can’t move ahead with their agreement; it is unenforceable unless Hamas signs on.

During his recent visit to Washington, former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben Ami made just that point to senior Bush administration officials and in his public appearances.

Ben Ami believes that U.S. and Israeli efforts to perpetuate the Hamas-Fatah split are utterly wrongheaded. He says that the United States and Israel must change their strategic objective in Gaza “from toppling Hamas to rescuing . . . the last chance for a two-state solution. This requires not only a cease-fire with Hamas, but also a return to a Palestinian national unity government . . . which can offer the peace process the vital legitimacy that it lacks today.”

Ben Ami believes that including Hamas in the negotiating process won’t harden Palestinian positions because even the Fatah moderates now negotiating with Israel cannot accept an “agreement that the extremists could label as a treacherous sell-out. Hence, the difference between the Palestinian positions in the current negotiations and those they may hold when a unity government is restored would only be very minor.”

In other words, it’s time to start dealing with reality. Hamas, like it or not, is reality. Isn’t it smarter to deal with it now rather than after the next war?

[end quote here]

The key paragraph above is the one beginning Ben Ami agrees… because what Rosenberg has in mind is a unity government between Fatah and Hamas but one in which the clear programme of Hamas of the destruction of Israel is what is accepted. That carries the day. Rosenberg is a man of words, remember those 361 weekly opinions, so the ordinary reader needs to watch those words carefully.

There is much therefore in what Rosenberg writes above that is worth looking at closely. He is obviously well connected and why would he be writing lies? I am sure Rosenberg is honourable, an honourable reactionary in fact.

1. Olmert has reached agreement with the Holocaust denier Mahmud Abbas on “key issues” which includes on return of Refugees (I presume Arab but not Jewish) and on Jerusalem (which I presume means the division of Jerusalem and giving up the site of the Jewish Temple to Islamofascists)

2. Rosenberg claims that Olmert and the US Government is opposed to a Unity Government. But the US Government are made up of professional liars and what they say is meaningless. What they do is what is in their interests. It is now clearly in the interests of the US Government led by Bush to have a Unity Government. They will indeed have a Unity Government if the US Government has anything to do with it.

Ted Belman on Israpundit has introduced this pro-US Imperialist outfit (masquerading as a Jewish organization) and the article by Rosenberg as being a matter of Hamas standing in the way of an agreement already arrived at.

http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=597#more-597

Yes, the agreement is already arrived at a long time ago in various conferences conducted by Rice. So it depends on Hamas. The whole future of Israel, if you believe that a Palestinian Arab state would be fatal for Israel, depends on the say so of Hamas.

This is indeed the whole crisis of Jews caused by Jewish leaders following US Imperialism. It has led Israel and the Jews of Israel into a terrible trap which is prepared for them by the forces of US Imperialism, and the forces of Fascism and of Antisemitism. The latter term for those who find it difficult to understand means hatred of Jews.

As for MJ Rosenberg, he is but a small cog in the whole trap being set for the Jews of Israel. We on 4international intend to familiarize ourselves with these small cogs. You have to know your enemy and these American Jewish leaders like Rosenberg are clearly the enemies of Israel and of Jews everywhere.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s