No, the 1990s, when it was one of the issues in US foreign policy.
Oh, you’re talking about that. In that case you should know that the period of the conflict where such a thing was possible ended when Rabin was assassinated and Netanyahu took his place. See: Literally his whole career, but most relevantly:
They asked me before the election if I’d honor [the Oslo Accords] […] I said I would, but … I’m going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the '67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I’m concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue.
And, well, there’s a reason they call him the king of Israeli politics and it’s definitely not because his policies are unpopular. Both Fatah’s Oslo-era strategy and the West’s strategy at the time were just never going to work with people like that.
In that case you should know that the period of the conflict where such a thing was possible ended when Rabin was assassinated and Netanyahu took his place.
… okay? How does that affect the fact that, demonstrably, Western and US interest was very acute and intense long before Hamas was a major force in the matter?
This is, after all, what you said and I objected to:
They also wouldn’t need to, because the West wouldn’t give a shit about Gaza without Hamas activities to put Palestine in the news.
Yeah fair enough I went on a weird tangent there. What I was trying to say was that the Western interest and support you were talking about was the kind that needed a good faith Israeli effort to amount to anything. There was no interest in forcing peace on Israel, is the point I was trying to make. That’s why when Israel put its foot down and said “nope” pretty much everyone played along, as best exemplified by the absolute shitshow that was Western reaction to the 2006 Palestinian elections. The kind of abject horror that’s now making four different heads of state say “we are not exporting weapons to Israel” (with varying degrees of truthfulness) to placate their populations simply wasn’t there. So to respond to your point: Western governments and people did want to being peace to Palestine, but it was viewed as just another regional conflict, not as settler colonists ethnically cleansing an indigenous population with Western support, so they were just another participant in the farce.
That’s why when Israel put its foot down and said “nope” pretty much everyone played along, as best exemplified by the absolute shitshow that was Western reaction to the 2006 Palestinian elections.
What reaction was it that you regard as a shitshow to the 2006 Palestinian elections?
The kind of abject horror that’s now making four different heads of state say “we are not exporting weapons to Israel” (with varying degrees of truthfulness) to placate their populations simply wasn’t there.
Yes, that’s taken an additional 20 years of Israeli massacres.
So to respond to your point: Western governments and people did want to being peace to Palestine, but it was viewed as just another regional conflict, not as settler colonists ethnically cleansing an indigenous population with Western support, so they were just another participant in the farce.
None of that has anything to do with the point regarding Hamas and whether its behavior has been in some way central to Western awareness of Gaza.
They also wouldn’t need to, because the West wouldn’t give a shit about Gaza without Hamas activities to put Palestine in the news.
Is your argument that Hamas running a disproportionately conservative mafia state in Gaza, funded by Israel and American ‘allies’ like Qatar, and the resulting tensions between Hamas and Fatah, wherein elections have been impossible for nearly 20 years now, has been in some way pivotal towards Western awareness of Israeli crimes?
Or has it been that the past 25 years of total domination of the Israeli right over the Israeli government has resulted in a government policy by the Israeli right that is, necessarily, more naked and brutal than ever to appeal to their core constituencies and hold onto power, alienating foreign allies to shore up domestic support, and Hamas’s contribution has been limited to boosting the polling numbers of Bibi et co?
Oh, you’re talking about that. In that case you should know that the period of the conflict where such a thing was possible ended when Rabin was assassinated and Netanyahu took his place. See: Literally his whole career, but most relevantly:
And, well, there’s a reason they call him the king of Israeli politics and it’s definitely not because his policies are unpopular. Both Fatah’s Oslo-era strategy and the West’s strategy at the time were just never going to work with people like that.
… okay? How does that affect the fact that, demonstrably, Western and US interest was very acute and intense long before Hamas was a major force in the matter?
This is, after all, what you said and I objected to:
Yeah fair enough I went on a weird tangent there. What I was trying to say was that the Western interest and support you were talking about was the kind that needed a good faith Israeli effort to amount to anything. There was no interest in forcing peace on Israel, is the point I was trying to make. That’s why when Israel put its foot down and said “nope” pretty much everyone played along, as best exemplified by the absolute shitshow that was Western reaction to the 2006 Palestinian elections. The kind of abject horror that’s now making four different heads of state say “we are not exporting weapons to Israel” (with varying degrees of truthfulness) to placate their populations simply wasn’t there. So to respond to your point: Western governments and people did want to being peace to Palestine, but it was viewed as just another regional conflict, not as settler colonists ethnically cleansing an indigenous population with Western support, so they were just another participant in the farce.
What reaction was it that you regard as a shitshow to the 2006 Palestinian elections?
Yes, that’s taken an additional 20 years of Israeli massacres.
None of that has anything to do with the point regarding Hamas and whether its behavior has been in some way central to Western awareness of Gaza.
Is your argument that Hamas running a disproportionately conservative mafia state in Gaza, funded by Israel and American ‘allies’ like Qatar, and the resulting tensions between Hamas and Fatah, wherein elections have been impossible for nearly 20 years now, has been in some way pivotal towards Western awareness of Israeli crimes?
Or has it been that the past 25 years of total domination of the Israeli right over the Israeli government has resulted in a government policy by the Israeli right that is, necessarily, more naked and brutal than ever to appeal to their core constituencies and hold onto power, alienating foreign allies to shore up domestic support, and Hamas’s contribution has been limited to boosting the polling numbers of Bibi et co?