Israpundit.com
By Ted Belman
Yoram Ettinger believes that the Obama administration is doing an about face in its mid east policies. See Obama Excludes the Arab-Israel Conflict. According to him,
- 1. Obama now considers attempting to mediate a solution is a loser’s game. He can’t get agreement and he only creates bad will toward him and the US.
2. “Washington’s international agenda does not consider the Arab-Israeli conflict to be a top priority.” When Obama came into office he was saying the opposite and promising agreement within two years.
3. Obama’s world view and our mutual differences are not enough to overwhelm our relations, “which are based on a much more solid foundation of shared values, joint interests and mutual threats”. One of these differences he refers to is “the unbridgeable US-Israel gap over the Secretary of State Rogers’ 1970 peace plan”.
This requires some explanation. When Resolution 242 was drafted and passed in 1967 after the Six Day War, those who drafted it and the US generally, said that, properly interpreted, Israel need not return to the pre ‘67 borders and was entitled to defensible borders. This meant that not all the land had to be returned. The Arabs and the French to name some of the detractors insisted in the return of 100%. The Rogers Plan signified the US agreement with them. This is the unbridgeable gap.
Many people don’t share his upbeat view and continue to expect that the other shoe will drop. I’ll leave it to them to enlarge on their positions.
For the sake of argument I’d like to support Ettinger’s view.
According to Ayad Jamal Aldin, a Shiite cleric and member of Iraqi parliament, “Iran’s objective is to drive the U.S. out of the Middle East,” and she is achieving it.
- Al-Qaida and Iran, he says, can control the whole Middle East, between al-Qaida’s “southern crescent” (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia) and Iran’s “northern crescent” (Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza).
Not only can the US not allow this to happen, her allies Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt and Israel would be directly threatened should Iran succeed. They are all putting pressure on Obama to stand strong. As much as it is not in his DNA to do so, I suggest he has no alternative.
Afghanistan and Pakistan are beyond her ability to control especially with Iran helping them and as Aldin suggests, she has already lost Iraq. To make matters worse Obama is committed to removing most US troops by next year.
Egypt is vulnerable. That is why she is building a steel fence with US money to seal in Iran’s proxy, Hamas in Gaza. Mubarak is in his eighties. When he goes you can expect the Muslim Brotherhood to attempt to seize power in Egypt, especially if Iran is not checked. The last thing Mubarak wants is for Israel to be weakened by the creation of Palestine. Jordan would be similarly weakened. The House of Saud’s principle concern is to stay in power. Al Qaeda is dedicated to bring them down. The war in Yemen is on their borders and very threatening. The primary reason Saudia Arabia supports the creation of Palestine is to mollify the Arab street. But that doesn’t mean she wants it created.
All this is in play even without Iran getting the bomb.
Although the US Senate voted unanimously to impose serious sanctions, Obama is still reluctant to do so. Hell, he even refused to support the opposition forces in Iran. Furthermore, both China and Russia are not yet on board. What will the US have to cede to them to get their agreement. It won’t come cheap. Nor will sanctions necessarily succeed.
I don’t see away around this for Obama. He must bring about regime change.
His first step along the way is set out in US Defying Iran by Arming Arabs
- The Obama administration is arming Gulf States to be able to defend against an Iranian attack while delaying a push for tough sanctions against the Islamic Republic. Reports of the weapons sales came one day after the U.S. Senate gave unanimous approval for a bill to target American companies that provide refined oil to Iran and would impose new sanctions on Iran’s refined petroleum sector.
Two major American newspapers revealed Saturday that the Obama administration is moving in the direction of deterring Iran by beefing up Arab countries’ defense against Iranian missile attacks, which would be more likely if Israel were to attack Iran’s nuclear reactors.
American officials told The New York Times that, “Our first goal is to deter the Iranians. A second is to reassure the Arab states, so they don’t feel they have to go nuclear themselves. But there is certainly an element of calming the Israelis as well.”
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at a Tehran conference on Saturday, “The Middle East is the crossroad of relations in the world and anyone who has the last word in the Middle East will have the final say in the world as well. Now the question is who has the last say in the Middle East? Well, of course, the answer is clear to every one.”
The implementation of the plans includes unprecedented coordination between the United States and Arab states. “It’s a tough neighborhood, and we have to make sure we are protected,” a senior government official in a U.S.-allied Arab state told the Times.
American aid is aimed at helping Saudi Arabia defend its oil facilities and beefing up its ground forces three times the current numbers in order to deter Al-Qaeda.
The deals with oil-rich Gulf States will pump billions of dollars into the American military industry, which is selling the United Arab Emirates 80 F-16 fighter jets. Patriot anti-missile systems are to be sold to the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar,
A U.S. army commander said in Bahrain last year that the UAE air force alone “could take out the entire Iranian air force, I believe.”
Of course it is an open question about how much of a deterrence it will be. Will these countries ever be battle ready? Aside from producing America jobs, such arming underlines the steps the US is taking to confront Iran. But I don’t believe they believe such deterrence is enough. Look at the trouble they are having with Yemen.
Ettinger writes in conclusion,
- The Middle East is a constant source of violently unpredictable challenges, which threaten vital US and Israeli interests. In order to effectively face such critical developments, it behooves the US and the Jewish State to maximize the utility of their mutually beneficial strategic common denominator.
There is ample precedents for the reordering of priorities. During the cold war, Israel was considered a strategic ally of the US in its fight to keep Russia at bay in the Middle East. During this time, there was no peace process.
The US needs Israel even more now to maintain stability and to keep the Iranians at bay. This strategic alliance must and will take precedents over the “peace process”.
