I was a bit thrown by Yair's comments about Bibi and Hamas as mirrors of one another. It's certainly true that Bibi has taken advantage of the Hamas-Fatah split and taken every opportunity to keep that split as wide as possible in order to forestall the creation of a credible Palestinian partner. In retrospect, it's obvious how stupid this cynical strategy was.
But is it true that Hamas used Bibi to tell their own people that there is no credible partner for peace on the Israeli side? Like, literally, did they ever say that? Because Hamas' popularity comes from their very explicitly reject even the idea of "peace" with Israel. (Well, that, and the fact that they are not the immensely corrupt Fatah.)
I just feel like Yair set up this bizarro-world symmetry in which Hamas is just cynically using Bibi's popularity to justify their rejectionist stance. They're not cynical at all. They are very open and honest about who they are--Islamists with a Palestinian nationalist flavor--and what they want--the complete destruction of Israel, the slaughter of its population, and its replacement by an Arab state run under Islamist principles. No amount of economic development or land swaps would moderate them.
I also think it's transparently obvious that at least some within the Israeli leadership (even the war cabinet) are considering Option D: annexing some or all of Gaza, and making the Gazan population an international problem. If that *is* going to happen, there is no incentive to remove Bibi beforehand. If Bibi annexes some or all of the Strip, then Gantz et al. get to claim that their hands are clean, while Bibi gets to claim that he's the PM with the stones to do what nobody else is willing to do to protect Israel.
Thank you both for such a clear conversation on the current situation in Israel. I believe the Gazans have agency and yet every conversation seems about what solution Israel or the US or other multinational and Arab coalitions should impose on them.
The question that I did not hear a clear answer to is: Will Gazans ever conclude that Israel is not going away and, instead of investing most of their ingenuity in creating a war machine that serves the interests of Iran, they could invest in a sustainable economy to include a beautiful resort economy on their coast and development of their own economy by cooperating with and benefitting from the wealth creation of the Israeli juggernaut? The alternative seems so terrible for both Gazans and Israelis.
I don't know how these comments work, and I'm a bit of a Johnny come lately, both to this episode, this blog, and substack altogether, but I thought I would throw my two cents in here, as they have clearly been sorely missed. L
I'm Israeli, in Israel. To address the question of if the Black Sabbath massacre might lead Israelis to think this situation needs to be resolved in a Palestinian state, the answer is, unambiguously and emphatically, no.
Israel occupies Judea and Samaria (or the west bank of the Jordan river in western parlance). There are frequent terrorist attacks from there, but there is nothing on the scale of what happened on the 7th. Hamas was only able to come to the place to have the capacity to do what it did, because Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. At that time, one of the promises was that by withdrawing, Israel would have international and moral backing to retaliate if there was attacks from there. This never happened, and rocket attacks became a monthly, if not weekly, experience.
That also says nothing about the reality that a disproportionate number of those killed and kidnapped on the 7th were those who most stridently believed in a Palestinian state. Israelis will not countenance living beside a Palestinian state unless we can be guaranteed that they won't try to destroy us. (That being said, offer them a state. They will never get a better deal then the one they rejected from Olmert, and they "never miss an opportunity to miss a opportunity")
Appreciate hearing about Harry Allen, aka the songwriting Italian who almost no one has ever heard of. "We're in the money" survives. It's one of American's theme songs.
For an Accidental Jazz History podcast I figured you would've known "Chattanooga Choo-Choo". As a jazz musician, we know LOTS of Harry Warren tunes. One of the Jazz Standards 101 tunes, "There Will Never Be Another You" is inescapable at novice jazz jams. One of my favorites is "The More I See You". One of my college big bands I direct is playing the Basie arrangement of that this term. The Chet Baker version is legendary.
I was a bit thrown by Yair's comments about Bibi and Hamas as mirrors of one another. It's certainly true that Bibi has taken advantage of the Hamas-Fatah split and taken every opportunity to keep that split as wide as possible in order to forestall the creation of a credible Palestinian partner. In retrospect, it's obvious how stupid this cynical strategy was.
But is it true that Hamas used Bibi to tell their own people that there is no credible partner for peace on the Israeli side? Like, literally, did they ever say that? Because Hamas' popularity comes from their very explicitly reject even the idea of "peace" with Israel. (Well, that, and the fact that they are not the immensely corrupt Fatah.)
I just feel like Yair set up this bizarro-world symmetry in which Hamas is just cynically using Bibi's popularity to justify their rejectionist stance. They're not cynical at all. They are very open and honest about who they are--Islamists with a Palestinian nationalist flavor--and what they want--the complete destruction of Israel, the slaughter of its population, and its replacement by an Arab state run under Islamist principles. No amount of economic development or land swaps would moderate them.
I also think it's transparently obvious that at least some within the Israeli leadership (even the war cabinet) are considering Option D: annexing some or all of Gaza, and making the Gazan population an international problem. If that *is* going to happen, there is no incentive to remove Bibi beforehand. If Bibi annexes some or all of the Strip, then Gantz et al. get to claim that their hands are clean, while Bibi gets to claim that he's the PM with the stones to do what nobody else is willing to do to protect Israel.
Thank you both for such a clear conversation on the current situation in Israel. I believe the Gazans have agency and yet every conversation seems about what solution Israel or the US or other multinational and Arab coalitions should impose on them.
The question that I did not hear a clear answer to is: Will Gazans ever conclude that Israel is not going away and, instead of investing most of their ingenuity in creating a war machine that serves the interests of Iran, they could invest in a sustainable economy to include a beautiful resort economy on their coast and development of their own economy by cooperating with and benefitting from the wealth creation of the Israeli juggernaut? The alternative seems so terrible for both Gazans and Israelis.
I don't know how these comments work, and I'm a bit of a Johnny come lately, both to this episode, this blog, and substack altogether, but I thought I would throw my two cents in here, as they have clearly been sorely missed. L
I'm Israeli, in Israel. To address the question of if the Black Sabbath massacre might lead Israelis to think this situation needs to be resolved in a Palestinian state, the answer is, unambiguously and emphatically, no.
Israel occupies Judea and Samaria (or the west bank of the Jordan river in western parlance). There are frequent terrorist attacks from there, but there is nothing on the scale of what happened on the 7th. Hamas was only able to come to the place to have the capacity to do what it did, because Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. At that time, one of the promises was that by withdrawing, Israel would have international and moral backing to retaliate if there was attacks from there. This never happened, and rocket attacks became a monthly, if not weekly, experience.
That also says nothing about the reality that a disproportionate number of those killed and kidnapped on the 7th were those who most stridently believed in a Palestinian state. Israelis will not countenance living beside a Palestinian state unless we can be guaranteed that they won't try to destroy us. (That being said, offer them a state. They will never get a better deal then the one they rejected from Olmert, and they "never miss an opportunity to miss a opportunity")
Appreciate hearing about Harry Allen, aka the songwriting Italian who almost no one has ever heard of. "We're in the money" survives. It's one of American's theme songs.
For an Accidental Jazz History podcast I figured you would've known "Chattanooga Choo-Choo". As a jazz musician, we know LOTS of Harry Warren tunes. One of the Jazz Standards 101 tunes, "There Will Never Be Another You" is inescapable at novice jazz jams. One of my favorites is "The More I See You". One of my college big bands I direct is playing the Basie arrangement of that this term. The Chet Baker version is legendary.