In fact, you didn't have to wait for the latest publication by Thomas Friedman of The New York Times to figure out who it was. It turns out that the hero of the enlightened class is once again displaying Western arrogance of the most orientalist kind imaginable – even though this is disguised as the voice of democratic liberalism.
Should we mention who he is? He reveled in the Arab Spring, eulogized the Taliban, stated that the younger generation of Islam had abandoned radicalization. That's the nature of the expertise.
Biden and Netanyahu during the US president's visit to Israel, photo: AP
The problem is that he is still held in certain influential wings as some kind of authority on Israel and the Middle East. And if we have to spell it out, let's be blunt for a moment: He wasn't just close to President Obama, and he wasn't just considered a "member of the household" in the White House – he's the kind of person whose critics use the term "conveyor of messages," i.e., "mouthpiece," to describe the relationship between the journalist and the most important and dominant center of power in the world.
Precisely for this reason, it is difficult to restrain one's assertions, and they must be understood as almost basic guidelines for American policy toward Israel. A month ago, he stated that "Israel has the worst leader in its history, perhaps even in the history of the Jewish people," and his hostility to Netanyahu is not hidden. Ten days after the massacre, he stated that "Biden must understand that Netanyahu is not fit to conduct the war."
Even before the reform, he published the conversation in which Biden conveyed to Netanyahu the unequivocal message that it must be stopped. He also announced that the United States had decided to "reconsider" its relations with Israel. This, by the way, happened last time a little over a decade ago, with President Obama.
So now Friedman is urging the White House, that is, his friend Biden, to stop the Israeli war machine. To draw a red line: declare victory and "go home," because at this stage "the prime minister of Israel is useless" and "prioritizes his electoral considerations over Israel's interests."
Sinwar. Oxygen for Hamas, photo: Arab networks
He proposes an outline: the withdrawal of the IDF, the return of the hostages and a permanent ceasefire under international sponsorship. The issue of the abductees, he estimates, "prevents rational military thinking," and according to his assessment, "there is growing discontent in the army with the Netanyahu government demanding fighting without presenting a clear political-political objective."
The audacity of the province
The thing is that the Western world – and worse, Hamas – concludes that international credit to Israel is running out. That there is a rift between Washington and Jerusalem. What is it, if not oxygen for Hamas? Friedman could have simply read in his column to Yahya Sinwar: "Hold on a little longer, Comrade, it's over soon."
By the way, he estimates that after Israel withdraws, the population of Gaza will already take care of Sinwar. It takes an obsessive hatred of Netanyahu and the right, and emotional opacity, to stick sticks in the wheels for Israel right now. To make terrible accusations against the Jewish state that is fighting for its existence, and its leadership, and to call on its ally to tie its hands.
IDF activity in the Gaza Strip. . Friedman's criticism reached the army, Photo: IDF Spokesperson
It is almost ironic that the hollowest oracle of the liberal-democratic wing, the one that vociferously opposes the occupation and Israeli control of the West Bank, calls on the head of the great empire to exert its weight against what he apparently perceives as a protégé, a brazen province that has raised its head beyond its deserved. It is even more astonishing to see how little, if any, respect the great Democrat has for Israeli democracy and sovereignty.
Because it is one thing to criticize Israel, its government, its leaders, its army from the pages of the newspaper. But Friedman's explicit call to impose policies on Israel as it struggles for survival is already a frightening remnant of an imperialism-era masterful mindset. It is amazing how from the heart of the Democratic establishment comes a voice for which U.S.-Israel relations are, in fact, equivalent to Iran-Hezbollah relations.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us