fbpx

Sunday Reads: The isolationist temptation, Why the US gets blamed for Syria, What would Brandeis do?

[additional-authors]
August 7, 2016

US

Richard Haas writes about the isolationist temptation facing the American public:

Isolationists must not prevail in this new debate over foreign-policy fundamentals, one which I had never imagined would take place in my lifetime. Turning away from global engagement would mean not just opportunities lost: in jobs reliant on exports, the chance to invest overseas, the ability to travel without fear. It also would bring conflict and nuclear proliferation. As the world unraveled, Americans would be more vulnerable to terrorism, illegal immigration, climate change and disease.

We do not have the option of becoming a giant gated community. Sooner or later, we would feel compelled to step in to restore stability and to right the balance of power.

Frederic Hof explains why America gets blamed for what’s happening in Syria:

A professional ground force — U.S.-led with regional, European, and American units — could finish the Syrian wing of this monstrosity quickly. But justifications for inaction are legion: Only indigenous ground forces should be permitted to do the job; beating these people in Syria will just encourage the survivors to go elsewhere; closing with and killing the ersatz ‘caliph’ and his co-conspirators only plays into their ‘crusader’ propaganda; there is no one prepared to administer eastern Syria once ISIS is destroyed… This is self-defeating excuse-making; some of it self-realizing.

Israel

Yair Rosenberg calls out Black Lives Matter’s accusations about Israel being genocidal:

The implication of these figures is unmistakable. Falsely accusing the state founded by Jews in the ashes of their own genocide of committing genocide is, simply put, a blood libel on a national scale. It is a slur against the 6 million Jews in Israel and the vast majority of world Jewry that supports them. That Black Lives Matter would indulge in such ignorant and incendiary claims undermines its standing as an anti-racist organization.

Haisam Hassanein writes a curious piece about the thousands of Egyptians currently living in Israel:

In light of the recent Egyptian overtures toward Israel, the issue of Egyptians living in Israel should be seen as a litmus test of how serious Cairo is about expanding the scope of normalization between the two countries. Cairo has been trying for many years to keep normalization to a bare minimum, as it discouraged any interactions between non-governmental officials and Israelis.

Normalization must not be limited to close security and trade ties; it must include people to be durable.

Middle East

Zack Beauchamp explains the “ransom money to Iran” episode and how it shows our debate about Iran is broken:

I’m not trying to say the Iranians are innocent little lambs. Iran is most certainly a very, very bad actor — it is spreading sectarian violence in Iraq (and elsewhere), funding anti-Israel terrorist groups, and devoting tremendous military resources to propping up Bashar al-Assad’s murderous regime in Syria. The nuclear deal hasn’t made Iran into a force for stability, as some deal proponents in the Obama administration hoped, and it probably won’t. These are real, serious foreign policy problems for the United States. But when our Iran debate focuses on misleading nuclear inspection minutiae or whether the Obama administration is “kowtowing” to Iran with things like the alleged hostage payment, we aren’t having a serious conversation about how to address Iran’s actually bad policies.

Dennis Ross and Andrew Tabler present the case for bombing Assad:

Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry have long said there is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. Unfortunately, Russia and Iran seem to think there is — or at least that no acceptable political outcome is possible without diminishing the rebels and strengthening the Syrian government. It is time for the United States to speak the language that Mr. Assad and Mr. Putin understand.

Jewish World

Ron Kampeas talks to leaders of Jewish organizations about the possibility of them denouncing Trump:

“Of late, we’ve found ourselves indeed calling out instances of bigotry on the campaign, like for example when Donald Trump described Mexicans coming over the border en masse as rapists and murderers, and then when he talked about closing the border to all Muslims, we spoke out about these things because, again, bigotry in all forms, whether it’s directed against Latinos or immigrants or Muslims or refugees, we find it reprehensible,” Greenblatt said.

Rick Richman reviews a new book on the life and thought of judge Brandeis:

Last but by no means least, anti-Zionism is now increasingly at home on the progressive left, and Brandeis would clearly part company there, too. He would view the tiny Jewish laboratory of democracy in the Middle East—established on a small percentage of what was deemed Palestine at the time of the Balfour Declaration and now a vibrant democratic polity—as confirmation that Americanism and Zionism are not only complementary but urgently needed in the world. Although Rosen does not address “what Brandeis would do” about Israel today, the man he calls an “American Prophet” would undoubtedly vigorously defend it and urge contemporary progressives—Jews and non-Jews alike—to do so as well.

Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

Print Issue: Got College? | Mar 29, 2024

With the alarming rise in antisemitism across many college campuses, choosing where to apply has become more complicated for Jewish high school seniors. Some are even looking at Israel.

More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.