Former President Barack Obama said a way forward for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only possible if people acknowledge the “complexity” of the situation.
“If there’s any chance of us being able to act constructively to do something, it will require an admission of complexity and maintaining what on the surface may seem contradictory ideas that what Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it. And … that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable,” Obama said in an interview on the podcast “Pod Save America.”
The former president’s comments come as the Israeli military focuses its offensive against Hamas in Gaza City and northern parts of the enclave.
What about Netanyahus relationship with the PLO before Hamas. He’s been playing both sides using the fear of Palestinian militants as a political football, just trying to stay elected and ignoring the views of the average secular Israeli.
Israel is being led by a group of religious extremists.
It’s complicated, and both sides have committed unbelievable atrocities, but Israeli leadership have overplayed their card. Their crimes over the last few weeks will echo for decades to come.
My guess it will have the opposite effect than they intended, Israel will lose out in the long term.
Time will tell.
You’re right that both sides have been awful.
While Israel may be led by a group of religious extremists, so is Palestine and Gaza specifically by extremist terrorists.
This round of tit for tat will echo like all the previous rounds over the last 70 years.
Until Hamas frees the hostages, it’s virtually impossible to overplay the hand.
This will just be another footnote of ugly killing on both sides in a long history of ugly killings.
I’m not so sure. The current geopolitical outlook leaves Israel in a tough spot. With the failure of globalisation and the declining importance of the Middle Eastern hydrocarbons, there is actually a breaking point.
I don’t necessarily think that breaking point would be reached, but if the current government does not restrain themselves and play their card correctly, it will count against them going forward.
Despite what Americans think, their previous actions have counted against them, too.
I’m the modern information age. The old tactics of statecraft and economic dominance fall apart. The opposing axis wanted Israel to respond like this. It’s a huge mistake for them to continue with this approach.
It’s a multipolar world these days.
Which are the poles you see in this multipolar world than were different from the poles over the last 50 years?
Suppose when you take the foreign policy of globalisation out of the equation, the geopolitical arena looks a lot different.
It’s hard to know how the relationships will develop. Israel geographical location has become at least 50% less important.
When you consider the possible impact of climate change and demographics over the next decade, coupled with the increasingly fragile financial outlook.
It’s not unfathomable that Israel ends up in an extremely exposed position without significant support from the West.
China and Russia are bound together by mutual interest in hydrocarbons, and Irans leaders would attempt to capitalise on every opportunity.
In a destabilised world, everyone will try to sieze the opportunity. It’s going to get very busy, Netanyahu is assuming a lot when he thinks that Israel is going to stay relevant in the long term.
Just wanted to add that it’s going to be multifaceted threats along with the multipolar geopolitical outlook. In situations like that, things get very simple. Things start to boil down to very simple decisions.
This doesn’t seem particularly internally consistent.
If the ME doesn’t matter because hydrocarbons don’t matter, why are Russia and China bound by them? Isn’t Russia in even deeper trouble since most of their hard currency is from exporting hydrocarbons?
When is the world being more destabilized than today and by who? Is the world stable right now?
Who is the financial outlook fragile for?
What are the impacts of climate change and demographics over the next decade?
How does this disproportionately work to the detriment of Israel?
I’m not even saying you’re wrong, but there’s a lot missing connecting this to the point you’re trying to make I think.
I always find it hard to explain the leaps in logic so bear with me.
-You just have to view everything that’s happening right now in the world with the understanding that a post hydrocarbon energy economy has ramifications for western economies financial systems while also on the opposite end of the spectrum, affecting developing nations ability to catch up.
The strength of the American dollar genuinely has been bolstered in the fact that it was the main currency used in the trade of hydrocarbons, this is no longer the case.
If China intends to continue its current military ambitions their demand for hydrocarbons is going to persist, as America retracts from the policy of globalisation a vacuum is being created which the Chinese would be more than happy to take advance of. Developing economies/regimes etc. won’t stymie themselves, they will continue to use them.
There is an obvious split in world geopolitics because of this post hydrocarbon/globalisation shift. unwrapping the ramifications of the effects of climate change and the switch to renewables coupled with energy independence it’s pretty complex, but it’s not unreasonable to expect destabilisation as we enter a new phase.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA800/RRA853-1/RAND_RRA853-1.pdf
Outlook is not looking good for everyone’s financial systems IMO, core economics and demographics are the best indicators of where the card lie at this time (US is always #1 in this regard). People look at inflation right now and analyse the Fed’s actions without taking into account that this is Cold War economics. Increase the amount of money you increase the amount of productivity, you stay ahead. There is undoubtedly restructuring ahead.
Well let’s talk demographics from a military perspective, A lot of the analysis of the Chinese military has been taken into account the fact that their demographics say they will have the most amount of eligible military personnel in the next decade, beyond that their numbers will be decreasing.
But then the question arises, are demographics going to matter in military situations in the future. Do you even need humans fight. Could it just become a AI powered military machine building contest?.
In a world with this much restructuring and destabilisation proxy wars are the preferred means of interacting, If I were to draw a line between these two opposing groups on the map, just like Ukraine, Israel would be right on it. As this plays out over the coming decade Israel is going to be continually tested in many different ways, when you look at the long term possibilities of how this is going to develop things are not as clear cut.
Netanyahu is not just battling Hamas he’s antagonising everyone on the other side of that line right now, essentially drawing a target on the country for eternity.
As public opinion in support of Israel decreases in the west the chances of an American boot on the ground in Israel decreases. What if the Chinese move on Taiwan, American resources focus elsewhere. American politics presents a majority which oppose the spending. Climate change and AI are certainly going to impact the political status quo in the coming year. Even presuming military dominance is in the balance. American foreign policy is obviously different in recent years, focusing on insular tactics.
I digress, Israeli leadership are all for playing their cards wrong.They are acting exactly like their enemies wanted them to, the would have been better just to pay them off.
Nothing justifies war crimes.
But people justify Hamas attacks all the time by claiming they just defend themselves.
Did you really just just conflate every Hamas operation as a war crime?
That’s… Impressive.
Netanyahu also stoked the anti-Oslo crazies to the point that Rabin was assassinated. He’s more responsible for the current state of the conflict than anyone, period.