Everywhere in the world, when arguments happen between two sides,
each side turns out to favor an outcome that's the opposite of the one favored
by the other side.
The same thing usually happens in the United States of America
except when one side is Jewish, at which time the give-and-take ceases to be an
argument, and becomes a never-ending haggling between a Jew representing Jewish
matters, and a Jew representing other Jewish matters, with both sides calling
for an outcome that’s favorable to Israel. And they call this charade, free
speech protected by the First Amendment.
This has been the shameful scene for at least half a century in
America, a span of time when the Jews monopolized all discussions about the
predominantly Arab Middle East, turning the talks into a haggling match between
Jews spewing one Jewish point of view, and Jews spewing another Jewish point of
view without Arab participation. And contrary to a normal discussion in which
one side or the other wins unless the two forge a compromise — the haggling has
always centered on the best way to serve the interests of Israel.
In fact, this is what's happening now ahead of the American
administration releasing a plan that promises to resolve the issues related to
the Jewish occupation of Palestine. Every Jew and his sidekick have been
writing about the subject, and three of them got into an actual, Jewish-style
haggling match.
Two of those, Aaron David Miller and Richard Sokolsky, got
together and wrote an article under the title: “Trump Isn't Just Reversing
Obama's Foreign Policies. He's Making it Impossible for His Successor to Go
Back to Them,” and the subtitle: “How the administration will fundamentally
damage US national interests for years to come.” It was published in Politico
Magazine on April 23, 2019.
Two days later, Jonathan S. Tobin responded to the Miller and
Sokolsky's article with one of his own that came under the title: “Trump's
Middle East Policies Are Not 'irreversible,'” and the subtitle: “Don't worry
Democrats, you can still reinstate Obama's failed approach to the region.” It
was published in National Review Online on April 25, 2019.
What Miller and Sokolsky are saying is that the Trump
administration is not just killing the Iran nuclear agreement as well as
foreclosing on the idea of a two-state solution in Palestine; it is stopping
the Iran deal from coming back to life, and making it impossible for a
Palestinian state to happen at all.
They explain that the decision to designate the Iranian
Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization will stand in the way of a
future administration reversing the Trump decision on the nuclear deal because
it will be accused of enabling state sponsored terrorism. As to the issue of
Palestinian statehood, by allowing Israel to annex the settlements, the idea of
creating a Palestinian state will become a physical impossibility.
Enter Jonathan Tobin who calls these arguments nonsense. He seems
to indicate that Aaron Miller and Richard Sokolsky were trying to scare members
of the Democratic Party into believing that the Republican administration of
Donald Trump was working on a doomsday scenario that even if they win the
upcoming presidential election, they will not be able to reverse the Trump
doings, or save humanity for that matter.
Fearing that the Democrats will be so energized as to go all out
and try to defeat Donald Trump in the upcoming election, Jonathan Tobin wanted
to reassure them that there will always be a way for a Democratic President to
reverse the Trump doings anytime they win the White House, be that in the near
future or the far future. Here, in condensed form, are his own words in that
regard:
“Miller and Sokolsky believe that Trump's successor won't be able
to reverse his approach to the Palestine issue or his withdrawal from the Iran
deal. But it is not beyond the Democrats' power to send us back to the
situation Trump inherited from Obama. Iran and the Palestinians hope that these
setbacks can be reversed because they are told by Western interlocutors they
should sit tight until 2021, when a Democratic successor to Trump will
reinstate Obama's policies … Any Democrat who seeks to reverse these moves will
face opposition. Yet, Trump's measures have not blown up the region, leaving
open the possibility of returning to the old policies”.
But Jonathan Tobin shows signs that he is the one that's worried
now about Trump losing the upcoming election. And so, he took pain to warn the
Republican voters that: “Trump is justified. His policy changes strengthen
America's position in the Middle East. But the permanence of those changes
remains in the hands of the voters.”