Trump, Bibi steer towards an ugly world, together
Each is a wannabe autocrat, each is working to undermine the rule of law and so-called elites in his respective country, each is seeking to crush what he calls a 'deep state' of government professionals. Each is steering his nation away from its once universal aspiration to be a 'light unto the nations' towards a narrow, brutish might-equals-right ethnonationalism that is ready to mainstream ethnic cleansing. Each treats his political opposition not as legitimate but as enemies within and each has filled his Cabinet with incompetent hacks, deliberately chosen for loyalty to him instead of the laws of their lands.
Each is driving his country away from its democratic traditional allies. Each asserts territorial expansion as a divine right — 'From the Gulf of America to Greenland' and 'From the West Bank to Gaza.'
Trump and Netanyahu are engaged, each in his own country, in creating a 'post-America' and a 'post-Israel' world. By 'post-America,' though, I don't mean an America that is losing relative power but an America that is deliberately shedding its core identity as a country, on its best days, committed to the rule of law at home and the betterment of all humanity abroad. By 'post-Israel,' I mean an Israel that is deliberately shedding its core identity — that of a proudly proclaimed rule-of-law democracy in a region of strongmen that will always prioritise a permanent peace with Palestinians (if its security can be assured) over 'a permanent piece'' of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
One simply cannot imagine Trump or Vice President JD Vance aspiring to build the America that Ronald Reagan described in his January 11, 1989, farewell address. Reagan spoke of the need to reinforce in our children 'what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world.' That America was a moral and political beacon, 'a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here.'
In mindlessly shrinking our own government and dissing so many of our traditional allies, 'Trump is not just destroying careers and values, he is quite literally making America weak again,' Stanford democracy expert Larry Diamond told me. That is about as 'post' the America I grew up in — and aspire to see my grandchildren grow up in — as I can imagine.
Netanyahu has been hard at work creating a similar post-Israel. Trump forced out his FBI director for being insufficiently loyal; Netanyahu is close to doing the same with Ronen Bar, the widely respected head of Israel's FBI equivalent, the Shin Bet, at a time when Bar is investigating some of Netanyahu's top aides.
Netanyahu himself is on trial on corruption charges. He stands accused by the Israeli opposition — and by more than a few relatives of hostages — of prolonging the war in Gaza to appease the Jewish supremacists who keep him in power and potentially out of jail.
He is also trying, as we speak, to remove Israel's independent and courageous attorney general because he apparently considers her disloyal. Since coming to office in late 2022, Netanyahu has also been on a mission to undermine the power of the Israeli Supreme Court to check the decisions of the executive and legislative branches.
Netanyahu's aim today is 'dismantling all the essential components of democracy,' Mickey Gitzin, director of the New Israel Fund, wrote in Haaretz on Sunday. 'The method is a simple one: You create a maelstrom of daring, illegal moves, simultaneously and on all fronts. While the public is reacting to the dismissal of the head of the Shin Bet security service, you advance draconian legislation against' non-governmental organisations.
Trump's and Netanyahu's domestic strategies have truly merged with the weaponisation of antisemitism as a way to silence or delegitimise critics. Readers of this column know that I have zero respect for any campus protesters who bash Israeli actions in Gaza without uttering a word of censure for Hamas — let alone a word of support for Ukrainians whose democracy is being savaged by Vladimir Putin's Russia. But ours is, for now, still a free country and if people aren't engaging in violent acts, or harassing other students in or out of class, they should be free to say whatever they want, including advocating a Palestinian state of whatever size they want.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
6 hours ago
- Observer
Palestinian Authority condemns Israel's WB settlement plan
The Palestinian Authority on Wednesday slammed Israel's approval of a key settlement project in the occupied West Bank, saying it undermined the chances of a two-state solution. The approval of the project in the area known as E1 "fragments... geographic and demographic unity, entrenching the division of the occupied West Bank into isolated areas and cantons that are disconnected from one another, turning them into something akin to real prisons," the PA's foreign ministry said in a statement. Israel approved a major settlement project on Wednesday in an area of the occupied West Bank that the international community has warned threatens the viability of a future Palestinian state. Israel has long had ambitions to build on the roughly 12 square kilometres known as E1 that lie just east of Jerusalem, but the plan had been stalled for years amid international opposition. Critics say the settlement would undermine hopes for a contiguous Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. Last week, Israel's far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich backed plans to build some 3,400 homes on the ultra-sensitive parcel of land that lies between Jerusalem and the Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim. UN chief Antonio Guterres warned that constructing Israeli homes there would "put an end to" hopes for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "I am pleased to announce that just a short while ago, the civil administration approved the planning for the construction of the E1 neighbourhood," the mayor of Maale Adumim, Guy Yifrach, said in a statement on Wednesday. All of Israel's settlements in the West Bank, occupied since 1967, are considered illegal under international law, regardless of whether they have Israeli planning permission. Aviv Tatarsky, a researcher at the Israeli anti-settlement organisation Ir Amim, said: "Today's approval demonstrates how determined Israel is in pursuing what Minister Smotrich has described as a strategic programme to bury the possibility of a Palestinian state and to effectively annex the West Bank. "This is a conscious Israeli choice to implement an apartheid regime," he added, calling on the international community to take urgent and effective measures against the move. Israeli NGO Peace Now, which monitors settlement activity in the West Bank, said last week that infrastructure work in E1 could begin within a few months, and housing construction within about a year. Excluding East Jerusalem, the West Bank is home to around three million Palestinians, as well as about 500,000 Israeli settlers. Meanwhile, Israel's defence minister approved a plan for the conquest of Gaza City and authorised the call-up of around 60,000 reservists, piling pressure on Hamas as mediators push for a ceasefire. Defence Minister Israel Katz's move came as mediators awaited an official Israeli response to their latest proposal. While mediator Qatar had expressed guarded optimism over the latest proposal, a senior Israeli official said the government stood firm on its call for the release of all hostages in any agreement. On the ground in Gaza City on Wednesday, Mustafa Qazzaat, head of the emergency committee in the Gaza municipality, described the situation as "catastrophic". He said that "large numbers" of people were fleeing their neighbourhoods, with the majority of those displaced "on the roads and streets without shelter." — AFP
Observer
10 hours ago
- Observer
Negotiation vs extortion
As anyone who caught even a bit of the day's news knows, President Donald Trump, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine and the leaders of Nato, the European Union, Britain and several European countries spent Monday at the White House negotiating a possible land swap and security guarantees that could end the Russian-Ukrainian war. But did they really? Let's think about the word 'negotiating'. All wars end with it, according to the popular saying, but rarely does the aggressor come to the table demanding territory that it doesn't actually control. Usually, the belligerents discuss which military gains should be formalised and which should be reversed. Vladimir Putin, however, has consistently demanded more land than his military has been able to bring under its control in the three and a half years since Russia's full-scale war began. During his summit with Trump in Alaska on Friday, Putin appears to have made a small concession: He is still demanding more land than he has occupied, but not as much as he used to demand. But less is still more. So let's talk about 'land swap'. This phrase seems to refer to Putin's offer to take a piece of Ukraine in exchange for not threatening an even bigger piece of Ukraine. This is not what we normally think of as a swap. It's what we think of as extortion. Let's also talk about the word 'land', or 'territory', which the leaders gathered at the White House on Monday used a lot. Zelensky referred to a map Trump apparently provided to facilitate discussion of 'territory'. Trump promised to get him a copy. But 'territory' is not an outline on a map. It's cities and towns and villages where people still live — even near the front line, even now. Before the full-scale war, the populations of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, the two Ukrainian cities on land Putin is demanding, were 200,000 and 100,000, respectively. We don't know how many people live there now — some people surely fled, some came from occupied territories, some died — but the number is almost certainly tens and possibly hundreds of thousands of people. To propose to cede the land to Russia is to propose either subjecting those residents to Russian occupation — which in other cities has involved summary executions, detentions and torture — or displacing them forcibly. Either would be a crime — a crime in which Trump is asking Zelensky to become an accomplice. This kind of negotiation-through-extortion is not unprecedented. In February 1945, the leaders of the Soviet Union, the United States and Britain met in Yalta — then a city in Soviet Ukraine, now a city in Russian-occupied Crimea — to negotiate the end of World War II. Among other things, Josef Stalin wanted the Kuril Islands, which stretched from Soviet Kamchatka to the coast of Japan. Franklin D Roosevelt and Winston Churchill agreed to let the Soviets have the Kurils. The islands weren't theirs to give — the Kurils belonged to Japan — but they were theirs to take. Six months later, Soviet troops, with significant support from the US military, took control of the islands and deported the Japanese residents. The Soviet troops had gone to Alaska to train for the operation. That military operation began on August 18, 1945, exactly 80 years before Trump met with Zelensky at the White House. Putin, who is a history buff and, more important, has for years been floating the idea of a second Yalta Conference, is certainly mindful of the date and the historical rhyme. More than 80 years after Yalta, no peace treaty exists between Japan and Russia. World War II never officially ended for these two countries, because Japan never ceded the Kuril Islands. All wars may end in negotiations, but not all negotiations end wars. The 20th century offers another example of extorting land. In 1938, Adolf Hitler demanded Sudetenland, a part of Czechoslovakia where ethnic Germans made up a significant percentage of the population. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain negotiated the surrender of the land, without involving Czechoslovakia. The higher purpose of those negotiations was security and peace for the rest of Europe. Less than a year after Czechoslovakia was forced to cede Sudetenland, however, Hitler attacked Poland and World War II began. That was the last war of aggression on the European continent until Putin attacked Ukraine. Hitler claimed that he, too, was fighting for peace and this was why he had no choice but to annex Sudetenland: 'I have made these tremendous efforts to further the peace, but I am not willing to stand any more attacks by Czechoslovakia'. In 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea, Putin effectively reprised a speech Hitler made before annexing Sudetenland, saying that his hand, too, was forced and 'Most importantly, we want peace and harmony to reign in Ukraine'. Which brings me to the subject of security guarantees. The last time Zelensky mentioned those in the White House, he got thrown out. This time, Trump acknowledged that any peace agreement must include security guarantees for Ukraine; during the Monday meeting, he even claimed that Putin agreed that such guarantees were necessary. But what could those be? Putin has said that Ukraine is a historical mistake, that there is no such thing as a Ukrainian nation or a Ukrainian language. How could anyone guarantee Ukraine's safety against a nuclear-armed neighbour who thinks Ukraine shouldn't exist? The only plausible answer would be membership in Nato or its equivalent — an agreement that would obligate the Western alliance, or whatever is left of it, to defend Ukraine to the full extent of its abilities. Putin has consistently cited the very possibility of such an agreement as the 'root cause' of his war against Ukraine. It is a safe bet that Putin will reject any agreement that involves a real promise of security for Ukraine. And that brings me to the number 'six' — something Trump kept invoking on Monday, when he claimed that he had resolved that many wars in his first seven months in office. The conflicts he is taking credit for resolving seem to be the ones between Congo and Rwanda (little evidence that it's over); Egypt and Ethiopia (ditto); India and Pakistan (there is evidence of very little US involvement); Kosovo and Serbia (same); Armenia and Azerbaijan (ditto, but the sides did go to the White House to sign an agreement); Cambodia and Thailand (US-backed talks resulted in a ceasefire, not necessarily an end to the conflict); Israel and Iran (Trump claims to have prevented a nuclear war by dropping bunker-busting bombs). That's actually seven. But also, none. — The New York Times Masha GessennThe author is a Russian and American journalist, author and translator
Muscat Daily
10 hours ago
- Muscat Daily
US: White House launches official TikTok account
Washington, D.C., US – The White House on Tuesday launched an official TikTok account, despite the China-based video-sharing app facing a ban in the US on the grounds of national security concerns. 'America we are BACK! What's up TikTok?' read a caption on the account's first post on the popular video sharing app, a 27-second clip. The account went live with a video showing footage of Trump declaring: 'I am your voice.' A couple of hours after the first video was posted there were just under 19 thousand followers, although US President Donald Trump's own TikTok account has 110.1mn followers. TikTok facing US ban Trump has continued to allow the platform to operate in the US while extending the deadline for TikTok to find a non-Chinese buyer. The current extension is due to expire in mid-September. Trump had initially tried to ban the social media network during his first term as president, but has since reversed his position and has credited it with helping him gain support among young voters in his return to the White House. 'The Trump administration is committed to communicating the historic successes President Trump has delivered to the American people with as many audiences and platforms as possible,' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said. 'President Trump's message dominated TikTok during his presidential campaign, and we're excited to build upon those successes and communicate in a way no other administration has before,' she added. There is concern among US lawmakers that user data could fall into the hands of China's government. Trump has been working on a deal for US investors to buy the app from TikTok's Chinese parent, ByteDance. DW
