Israpundit.com
[I wrote this two days ago but couldn't post it until today.]
By Ted Belman
Since Secretary Clinton read the Riot Act to PM Netanyahu last Friday, the Obama administration has been back pedaling.
She is now saying “We have an absolute commitment to Israel’s security. We have a close, unshakable bond between the United States and Israel and between the American and Israeli people, who share common values and a commitment to a democratic future for the world.”
Taken at face value, she is saying even if Israel doesn’t capitulate to our or Arab demands, the US will always supply Israel with what it needs to defend itself. Hardly.
State Department spokesman, J.P. Crowley had advised The Washington Post on Saturday that Clinton called Netanyahu “to make clear the United States considered the announcement a deeply negative signal about Israel’s approach to the bilateral relations..” and to say “this action had undermined trust and confidence in the peace process and in America’s interests.” WaPo expressed the view that “Clinton appeared to link U.S. military support for Israel to the construction in East Jerusalem.” These threats cannot be so easily wiped away.
What undermines the peace process is that the Palestinians don’t want to negotiate. Why should they? They believe they will get everything they want without negotiations. They are expecting Obama to deliver.
In Tuesday’s softer message, she also said the US was “engaged in very active consultations with the Israelis over steps that we think would demonstrate the requisite commitment to the process.” AP headlined this speech as follows; Clinton: Israel must prove commitment to peace.
Why so? Netanyahu, has by word and deed, demonstrated his commitment to peace, but peace on his terms. These terms included, not dividing Jerusalem, being recognized as a Jewish state and an end of conflict agreement, among others. He has accepted a two state solution and a partial building freeze. He has removed roadblocks and enabled the Palestinian economy to flourish. But these terms will never be accepted by the Arab League or Abbas and thus they are not acceptable to Obama.
Pres Obama is therefore behind this over reaction and threatening tone. He is not satisfied to only get the negotiations on track again (otherwise he would not have reacted at all), He wants, as he said a year ago, to get an agreement in two years. This will only be possible if he can get Netanyahu to share Jerusalem and he knows it. Thus all the pressure. By saying bilateral relations are threatened, he is threatened to withhold jet fuel and munitions in times of war or to not protect Israel from Security Council resolutions. Israel cannot have confidence that she and the US have an “unshakeable bond” at least, so long as Obama is President.
By accusing Israel “endangering US lives in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.” and “insulting” and “embarrassing” the US, the Obama administration is trying to undermine the American peoples support for Israel. This too won’t work. Though some Americans will take umbrage others will rally around Israel.
Jeffery Goldberg in The Atlantic, suggested the reason Obama caused this tempest was to bring down Netanyahu’s coalition and to replace it with one more amenable to his designs. That is a tactic only and not a goal. Not to worry, Netanyahu is secure. Even if Labour left the coalition, Netanyahu would still have 61 seats all of whom are committed to keeping Jerusalem united and the capital of Israel. AIPAC is fully supportive of such a goal and recently dressed down Obama for his treatment of Israel and next week 6000 AIPAC activists will be swarming the halls of Congress and the Senate to make such views know.
Obama can’t possible win this fight. He will be the worse for wear. Already the pro-Israel friends are rallying around Netanyahu and an undivided Jerusalem and Obama is looking isolated except for the support from IPF and J Street although they too have questioned his tone. This fight may also result in it being even harder for Democrats to get Obamacare passed. The more it drags on the more he will be weakened and the stronger Netanyahu will become.
Mid term elections are fast approaching and few Democratic candidates will want to support him on this. By September the temporary freeze will be over, the four month timetable to negotiations imposed by the Arab League will be over and Netanyahu will be able to restart construction. Then come US elections in November and Presidential primaries a year from now. Ball game over.
VP Biden would not have said Israel was “endangering US lives in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.” were it not for report sent by Gen Patraeus to the Pentagon in January.
Gen David Patraeus, the head of CENTCOM, was wrong to suggest in that report “that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM’s mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region, ..” just as he was wrong last year to blame the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for the existence of Hezbollah by saying “Hezbollah’s justifications for existence will become void if the Palestinian cause is resolved.”
The only US promises they are losing faith with are the promises to stop Iran from getting the bomb. They really don’t care about solving the Israeli/Arab conflict.
Hezbollah exists to further the ambitions of Iran which go way beyond destroying Israel. Why doesn’t he understand this. Even if some kind of agreement was worked out, Iran and Hezbollah would still be dedicated to destroying Israel and attacking the US.
The US must disengage from the peace process. Nothing will come of it. No party will budge. Instead the US should allow Israel to work it out with the Palestinians without the interference of the international community just as was the case before Oslo.
“Taken at face value, she is saying even if Israel doesn’t capitulate to our or Arab demands, the US will always supply Israel with what it needs to defend itself.”
B_ll Sh_t. If we were committed to Israel’s defense, we would not have just redirected to Diego Garcia 357 bunker-buster bombs that were slated to be delivered to Israel.
B_ll Sh_t.
B_ll Sh_t.
B_ll Sh_t.
Comment by BlandOatmeal — March 19, 2010 @ 5:59 am
…bombs, by the way, which are as likely to be used against Israel as against anyone else.
Comment by BlandOatmeal — March 19, 2010 @ 6:02 am