A missed opportunity at the Knesset

[Violet_Crumble]

Gordon Brown's choice of the Knesset today as the place to make a strong statement on Iran was not the only misjudgment on his trip to Israel. It could not help but give the impression that the prime minister supports the belligerent statements from senior Israelis about the need to strike Iran militarily to block its access to nuclear weapons. At a time when talks are underway with the Iranians and with sanctions still in play, the last thing needed from responsible western leaders is any hint that force is permissible.

Hopefully, Brown misspoke when he called on Iran to "suspend its nuclear weapons programme", a programme which was halted in 2003, according to the most recent United States national intelligence estimate. But his slip of the tongue was revealing. An attack on Iran, even if it were proved to be trying to acquire nuclear weapons in violation of the non-proliferation treaty, would be illegal, inflammatory and sure to create massive instability throughout the Middle East and the Persian Gulf.

The prime minister was also wrong to repeat the notorious mistranslation of the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's words about Israel. He is in good company among western politicians in claiming Ahmadinejad said Israel must be "wiped off the map". But that does not excuse Brown and his advisers from failing to consult specialist opinion. Independent Farsi-speaking experts outside Iran pointed out at the time that Ahmadinejad's remark followed a passage in his speech where he said the Shah's regime and the Soviet Union both collapsed quite suddenly. He went on to say that the "regime occupying al Quds (Jerusalem) must be eliminated from the page of time". Some will see this as just as threatening as "wiped off the map", as I wrote in a blog two years ago, but others will accept that the Iranian president was expressing a wish for the future. He was not suggesting that Iran would be the instrument for getting Israeli control removed from Jerusalem, let alone for destroying the Israeli state altogether.

Brown did well to draw attention to Israel's grim separation wall. Standing in Bethlehem, he eloquently described it as "graphic evidence of the urgent need for justice for the Palestinian people, the end to the occupation and the need for a viable Palestinian state". He did not buy the argument, in his public comments, that the wall is primarily a security tool. The fact that it does not run along the 1967 borders makes it clear to most observers that the wall is another instrument for incorporating Palestinian land into an expanded Israeli state. The wall also undermines the Palestinian economy by splitting the West Bank into incoherent segments.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/21/gordonbrown.israelandthepalestinians

[LeftishBrit]

1. Well, considering that the British Mandate ended 60 years ago...

it's not really up to Gordon Brown.

I wouldn't mind him giving a bit of tough talk on the issues to Israel, however. Israel does do a lot of very stupid things. But of course, it would then be only fair for some Israeli politicians to tell him not to let his country get involved in any more illegal wars, and, while he's at it, to stop using Thatcherism as the model for socialist economic policy. If British politicians can dish out the criticism, they can take it too!

As regards the Ahmadinejad quote: Ahmadinejad has said so many times some variation on the idea that Israel should cease to exist as a Jewish state, at least in the Middle East, that I don't think you can blame it on mistranslation. If he has possibly not said exactly, "Israel should be wiped off the map", he has certainly said "The Zionist regime should vanish" and the like - which really means the same thing. What *is* possibly relevant is that in most of the quotes he is expressing a wish, and not actually threatening to get rid of the 'Zionist entity' himself. I oppose military action against Iran; but I don't think that Ahmadinejad is a nice sweet pussycat either. He needs watching. As do many leaders who are not current American bogeys.

[Violet_Crumble]

2. What's not really up to Gordon Brown?

When it comes to leaders of countries criticising other countries, if Olmert were to address the British parliament and give them a chiding for getting involved in any more illegal wars, that'd be pretty damn hypocritical, seeing as how the Israeli govt supported the invasion of Iraq. On the other hand the British govt does oppose the separation barrier and supports a viable Palestinian state. The problem was exactly what the author of the article said - Brown's words were aimed at the wrong audience....

Ahmwhatsie is a complete nutter, and a thoroughly nasty little man. The sooner him he's a thing of the past when it comes to politics, the better. But Brown goes beyond that when he makes false statements like calling on Iran to suspend its nuclear program when he knows very well that it has been suspended. He's feeding the invasion frenzy that the US govt is trying to maintain at a high level, and that was irresponsible...