Israel's Former UN Ambassador Explains Why She Could No Longer Represent Israel
"…If we no longer had the support of the Americans, that would be terrible. I know they’re sick of it [i.e., supporting Israel]. We’ve become a burden instead of an asset. When, in your opinion, did we cross the line? Recently. With the refusal, the empty declarations about our desire to enter negotiations. I also know that someone in the Obama administration said that our prime minister is conducting a campaign on behalf of Romney."
Gabriella Shalev
Ha'aretz has a disturbing interview with Gabriella Shalev, Israel's former UN Ambassador. She is especially critical of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – deservedly so in my opinion. Here's an excerpt:
You once made a statement that stuck in my mind: “The United Nations is the place where all the hatred is concentrated.”
True, that’s exactly how it is. And at the United Nations, our great, important and true friend is the United States.
In effect it’s the only one that defends us, right? It uses its veto.
There’s also Canada, but Canada isn’t a member of the Security Council. On the other side are England and France, which are members of the council, and Germany, which is not a member, which are sick and tired of this government’s policy. These are very hard times and the fact that the [Israeli] prime minister is directing all his energy and rhetoric against the United States is simply a terrible thing, in my opinion. It’s going to boomerang, and I say that from experience.
So what are we actually doing, burning bridges?
Yes. Definitely.
As a result of a deliberate decision?
The prime minister says to [U.S. Secretary of State] Hillary Clinton, “You have no moral right to present us with red lines.” What’s “You have no moral right?” What does that mean? I know from what I’ve seen in the United Nations that without the United States we would be denounced. Isolated. They would throw us out of there. Like South Africa [during apartheid].…
The question is whether we are systematically being presented with a false display of strength. How does Benjamin Netanyahu even dare to oppose the United States? How do you understand it?
Look, I don’t for a moment make light of the Iranian threat. I’ve heard their speeches, and during my tenure at the UN I was also exposed to intelligence information. There’s no question that it’s a very serious threat; the Americans know what we know, and they know terrible things. It’s a terrible country, whose leadership has declared that the State of Israel will be destroyed. There has never been such a thing. And Netanyahu believes that we have to deal with this threat.
Can we?
At this stage yes. And what will happen then? Nobody talks about it, and I’m even somewhat afraid to say it, but aren’t they thinking about the pilots who will be flying such a long distance? I’m not even thinking yet about the counterstrike. I assume that Netanyahu thinks that we can manage without the United States. I think that’s terrible.
Do you trust the Americans?
Definitely. We don’t have a better, more important and more loyal friend. They believe that the State of Israel is the most important democracy in the Middle East. I know that because of my personal and professional connections with the American delegation and the person who heads it. I also know how much intelligence information, plans, strategy, support and budgets are invested in this channel. Not to mention their invaluable assistance in the international arena.…
Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, personally pushed for the State of Israel to be included in all kinds of regional committees and groups, and has always cooperated with us. I’m sure it’s on the instructions of the White House. And that’s why I say that if we no longer had the support of the Americans, that would be terrible. I know they’re sick of it [i.e., supporting Israel]. We’ve become a burden instead of an asset.
When, in your opinion, did we cross the line?
Recently. With the refusal, the empty declarations about our desire to enter negotiations. I also know that someone in the Obama administration said that our prime minister is conducting a campaign on behalf of [Republican Party candidate Mitt] Romney.…





She says basically nothing, good riddance!
Posted by: Reese | October 19, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Israel is in a tough situation. It needs Iran to be attacked to end their nuclear program. If they start the war it will be costly on them in all respects. If America attacks Iran first then first of all Israel will be standing on the sideline like in the past mideast conflicts since the US will need Arab support for coalition building hence will ask Israel to stay out of the fray.
Rommey is more likely to begin the war with Iran and hence Israel will be the better for it.
Posted by: Marc | October 19, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Leftists always get upset when Israel defends itself and puts its interests first.
Posted by: Garnel Ironheart | October 19, 2012 at 12:41 PM
Israel is in a tough situation. It needs Iran to be attacked to end their nuclear program. If they start the war it will be costly on them in all respects. If America attacks Iran first then first of all Israel will be standing on the sideline like in the past mideast conflicts since the US will need Arab support for coalition building hence will ask Israel to stay out of the fray.
Rommey is more likely to begin the war with Iran and hence Israel will be the better for it.
Posted by: Marc | October 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM
She was a liberal academic who took a position beyond her abilities. She had weak communications skills and anyone who met her during her tenure new she was in job beyond her pay grade.
Posted by: reuvain | October 19, 2012 at 12:46 PM
Not all Americans are sick of supporting Israel, or see it as a liability.
Posted by: Yochanan Lavie | October 19, 2012 at 01:05 PM
If Israel continues on its current course it will lose the support of the majority of Americans in a few years. Whether you think Israel acts correctly, or not, this should be troubling to you. Without strong US support, Israel is extremely vulnerable.
Posted by: Jason | October 19, 2012 at 01:05 PM
My fear is that the ultra right in Israel will want to level Iran with nuclear arms. This is NOT an option. Israel will become a pariah among nations. The US will have no choice than to turn its back on Israel.
At that point, no matter how many nukes or how great an army, WE WILL BE WASHED INTO THE SEA.
Time to step back.
Posted by: Alter Kocker | October 19, 2012 at 01:13 PM
Bush didn't attack Iran, Obama didn't and neither will Romney. We can't afford another war and occupation.
Posted by: SkepticalYid | October 19, 2012 at 01:32 PM
Leftists always get upset when Israel defends itself and puts its interests first.
Posted by: Garnel Ironheart | October 19, 2012 at 12:41 PM
Funny, there seems to be a contingent of right-wing Jews, both in Israel and the U.S., who get upset when Americans (American Jews included) put America's interests first.
The two interests are more often than not the same. But I know, how dare we as Americans point out that we can't afford another war, either monetarily or in terms of human life?
Posted by: Elisheva | October 19, 2012 at 02:31 PM
People who live in the leftist bubble think that Americans are sick of Israel. And they're right - the American left is sick of Israel.
The majority of america is not sick of Israel. All the more reason to support the American right - the majority of America.
Oh, and before I forget. Nobody wants America to attack Iran. All Israel asks is that America not get in the way. That America not tell Israel how to defend itself.
Now, here's the issue that Bibi was having with Obama. Obama was telling Bibi that he won't allow Israel to attack. So Bibi kept asking, "If we don't attack, will you attack? Do you at least have red lines?"
And when Hillary recently revealed that the Obama Administration has no red lines for Iran, that is when Bibi said his infamous comment, that "if you will not give Iran red lines, then you have no moral right to tell Israel what to do."
The leftists of course can't understand what that means. What it means is actually quite simple: "we are willing to attack Iran and defend ourselves. Please don't tell us how to defend ourselves. But if you don't want us to do it ourselves, at least tell us that you will do it. If you won't, then we have the right to do it ourselves and you have no right to stop us."
It's quite simple, actually. Unless you are a rabid leftist.
Posted by: Lubavitchers are Christians | October 19, 2012 at 03:26 PM
Posted by: Lubavitchers are Christians | October 19, 2012 at 03:26 PM
Dubya blocked Israel when they wanted to attack Israel too, you ignorant moron.
Posted by: SkepticalYid | October 19, 2012 at 04:22 PM
Remember when Reagan condemned Israel's attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor?
For some reason, today's right wing frumma, like LaC, have no recollection of this.
Posted by: WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar | October 19, 2012 at 04:58 PM
Dubya blocked Israel when they wanted to attack Israel too, you ignorant moron.
You meant "attack Iran". About the "ignorant moron" remark - no correction needed there, by any means.
Posted by: Jeff | October 19, 2012 at 05:33 PM
LaC, I live in a rabid leftist bubble and I get it.
Posted by: dh | October 19, 2012 at 06:44 PM
For some reason, today's right wing frumma, like LaC, have no recollection of this.
They're all suffering from Romnesia.
Posted by: Jeff | October 20, 2012 at 06:46 AM
Jeff, good one!
Posted by: WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar | October 20, 2012 at 07:38 AM
Can't take the credit; Obama told it to me at the mosque yesterday.
Posted by: Jeff | October 20, 2012 at 06:31 PM
Posted by: Jeff | October 19, 2012 at 05:33 PM
Thanks Jeff, I still haven't got the hang of typing on an iPad. I have to turn off the autocorrect feature and proofread more.
Posted by: SkepticalYid | October 20, 2012 at 09:57 PM
Israel is in a terrible bind. US conventional capabilities (at the moment, even with, as Ahmedinejad (yemach shemo) incorrectly -- he's wildly understating the reality -- said, a 16 trillion and climbing debt) greatly exceed Israel's. If Iran perceives US weakness and/or unwillingness to seriously consider military action to stop the next Islamic bomb, it will increase the likelihood that Israel, with its lesser conventional capabilities must act and that that action would necessarily need to include nuclear weapons.
Posted by: Yoel B | October 21, 2012 at 12:33 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/opinion/why-netanyahu-retreated-on-attacking-iran-soon.html?ref=benjaminnetanyahu&_r=0
Posted by: WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar | October 21, 2012 at 09:31 AM
Please don't tell us how to defend ourselves
Have fun. Just don't come begging for planeloads of Patriot batteries and adult diapers like during Gulf War I when Saddam Hussein was sending SCUDs downrange.
Posted by: Nigritude Ultramarine | October 22, 2012 at 07:13 PM