Former President Barack Obama said a way forward for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only possible if people acknowledge the “complexity” of the situation.

“If there’s any chance of us being able to act constructively to do something, it will require an admission of complexity and maintaining what on the surface may seem contradictory ideas that what Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it. And … that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable,” Obama said in an interview on the podcast “Pod Save America.”

The former president’s comments come as the Israeli military focuses its offensive against Hamas in Gaza City and northern parts of the enclave.

  • rhizophonic@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I’m not so sure. The current geopolitical outlook leaves Israel in a tough spot. With the failure of globalisation and the declining importance of the Middle Eastern hydrocarbons, there is actually a breaking point.

    I don’t necessarily think that breaking point would be reached, but if the current government does not restrain themselves and play their card correctly, it will count against them going forward.

    Despite what Americans think, their previous actions have counted against them, too.

    I’m the modern information age. The old tactics of statecraft and economic dominance fall apart. The opposing axis wanted Israel to respond like this. It’s a huge mistake for them to continue with this approach.

    It’s a multipolar world these days.

    • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Which are the poles you see in this multipolar world than were different from the poles over the last 50 years?

      • rhizophonic@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Suppose when you take the foreign policy of globalisation out of the equation, the geopolitical arena looks a lot different.

        It’s hard to know how the relationships will develop. Israel geographical location has become at least 50% less important.

        When you consider the possible impact of climate change and demographics over the next decade, coupled with the increasingly fragile financial outlook.

        It’s not unfathomable that Israel ends up in an extremely exposed position without significant support from the West.

        China and Russia are bound together by mutual interest in hydrocarbons, and Irans leaders would attempt to capitalise on every opportunity.

        In a destabilised world, everyone will try to sieze the opportunity. It’s going to get very busy, Netanyahu is assuming a lot when he thinks that Israel is going to stay relevant in the long term.

        Just wanted to add that it’s going to be multifaceted threats along with the multipolar geopolitical outlook. In situations like that, things get very simple. Things start to boil down to very simple decisions.

        • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          This doesn’t seem particularly internally consistent.

          If the ME doesn’t matter because hydrocarbons don’t matter, why are Russia and China bound by them? Isn’t Russia in even deeper trouble since most of their hard currency is from exporting hydrocarbons?

          When is the world being more destabilized than today and by who? Is the world stable right now?

          Who is the financial outlook fragile for?

          What are the impacts of climate change and demographics over the next decade?

          How does this disproportionately work to the detriment of Israel?

          I’m not even saying you’re wrong, but there’s a lot missing connecting this to the point you’re trying to make I think.