Reply to Daniel Pipes

Submitted by Fay Voshell (United States), Mar 23, 2009 at 09:43

Dr. Pipes,

Thanks for your response. I did read the article you referred to.

I think there is much more to Netanyahu's vacillations, real or perceived, than meets the eye. His changes in policy are not due merely to a personal deficiency, though of course he is responsible for his decisions.

I recall an ashen-faced Yitzhak Rabin shaking hands with Yassar Arafat at the 1993 Oslo Accords while a smiling US president showed open delight at having "achieved" peace for the Middle East. Rabin had to concede things that revolted him while knowing full well that Arafat had no intention of giving up the terrorist policies he committed the PLO to from 1968 on.

As a matter of fact, a prevailing goal of nearly every president of the US since 1948 has been to achieve "peace." Of course, that goal has never been realized, but the link between American policy and Israel's policies has remained inextricable. Any prime minister has felt the weighty hand of the US in all major decisions. Some of those decisions have not always been what a given seated prime minister might have wanted, but in many respects, American policy has wagged the dog.

One other thing: Anyone familiar with Israel itself knows it is wildly fragmented and full of internal upheavals to which any prime minister has to respond in a multiplicity of ways which often seem contradictory. As Paul Johnson points out in his History of the Jews, the deep dividing differences in Israel's political parties most often yield to pragmatic compromises rather than to lofty ideals. Too, there is the deep divide between the secular Zionist state and the religious demands of Judaism itself. For instance, while secularists scratch their heads over Orthodox Jews' visionary belief in the importance of the appearance of a red heifer, deeply religious Jews are incensed over what they see as secularists' godlessness in general.

All of the above to say some of Netanyahu's vagaries are explicable while condeding that some are not. What will matter most in the long run for Israel, of course, is his committment to Israel's national security.

Fay Voshell

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".