Tag: Israel

The situation in the Middle East is, perhaps, the most exigent in the last 50 years. Syria is engaged in a civil war; Egypt is under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood; Iraq is being ravaged by ISIS, which is a very militant branch of Al Qaeda; and Iran is on the verge of becoming a nuclear power. All of this violence and instability poses a very real threat to the security of moderate Muslim states, such as Jordan and Saudi Arabia, and to Israel, our one reliable ally in the region.

The US has done nothing to defuse these crises. For the past six years, its policy in the region, indeed all over the world, has been characterized by indecisiveness, appeasement and leading from behind. In trying to make everyone our friend we have succeeded in making no one our friend. No country fears or respects us. Our enemies continue to hate us and seek to destroy us regardless of how many concessions we grant. They feel they can do what they want with no fear of repercussions, and our allies have become fearful and mistrustful. With respect to the Middle East, by withdrawing from the area, both militarily and politically, we have exacerbated the situation by emboldening militants, such as Syria, Iran and ISIS.

I believe that the biggest loser in all of this will be Israel. From its very birth as a nation in 1948 Israel has existed under the constant threat of attack by its Arab neighbors. They deny its very right to exist, and they would annihilate it if they could. Indeed, in the last 66 years Israel has been engaged in constant conflict. It has only survived through its own determination and fighting prowess and the strong, unwavering support of the US. In 1948 the US was one the first countries to recognize Israel as a State. It took President Truman all of 11 hours to do so. The US has continued to provide money, material and encouragement. Virtually, every serious US politician has been on board with this policy. Israel and the US have a symbiotic relationship. Israel has relied on the US’s support, and, in turn, it has provided the US with its only reliable ally in the region.

At this point, I would think that Mr. Netanyahu and his ministers are wondering just how “strong” and “unwavering” the US’s support will continue to be. Mr. Obama has been neutral, at best, and, arguably, downright hostile toward Israel with respect to the peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. I am reminded of the interchange between Golda Meir and President Nixon in the early 1970’s. Supposedly, during one of the times when Israel was negotiating to buy weapons from the US, President Nixon asked Ms. Meir why Israel needed so many weapons since the US has always provided Israel with its unwavering support? Ms. Meir replied something like “Mr. President, in the future we just want to make sure that we can survive until you decide to provide that support.” It is well-known that the current administration’s support has not been nearly as strong and unwavering as that of every other administration since 1948. According to the Washington Post, Mr. Obama has been laying the groundwork to blame Israel if the peace process talks were to fail. He has been attacking Israel for what he views as its intransigence. Furthermore, he has characterized Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas as “a man of peace,” and he warned Mr. Netanyahu that the US could no longer “protect Israel” were the talks to fail. Evidently, Mr. Obama is too blinded by his antipathy towards Israel and, perhaps, Jews as well, to realize that a negotiation is a two-sided affair. If I were Israel I would doubt just how reliable a supporter the US will continue to be prospectively.

CONCLUSION AND PREDICTION

It is well-known that Israel has considered a pre-emptive strike against Iran to diminish its nuclear capabilities and the threat they represent both to it and the region as a whole. They have executed pre-emptive strikes before, and it is the smart thing to do, militarily. It is in their nature to act decisively rather than to dither, which is what Mr. Obama’s modus operandi is. Of course, there would be political repercussions, but, traditionally, Israel has not let that stop it when it believed its national security was being threatened. I believe that the Administration has been restraining them by promising to “handle the situation.” Well, the US has not “handled” the Iran situation, and, now, the ISIS invasion of Iraq has heightened the threat to destabilize the entire region.

So, that is Israel’s dilemma. What does it do? Does it follow its natural inclination and make a preemptive strike while it can and risk angering its one ally? Or, does it continue to trust the US and let things play out with the risk that matters will deteriorate beyond anyone’s ability to resolve them? It is not an easy answer, a “Hobson’s Choice,” if you will. Quite possibly, Israel’s very survival depends on the answer.

Recently, Secretary of State John Kerry stated that Israel “risks becoming an Apartheid state” if the current peace negotiations were to fail. Kerry spoke in a closed-door meeting, and he had reason to doubt that his words would become public. But, in this day and age, there is no expectation of privacy. Someone always has a recording device.

Later, in the face of substantial shock, outrage and criticism from the Anti-Defamation League, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Republican Jewish Coalition, among others, Kerry tried to backtrack. He stated that he miss-spoke, and asserted that if he could “rewind the tape,” he would have used a “different word.” Kerry is a seasoned politician and the US’s highest ranking diplomat. They are trained to choose their words very carefully. Are we supposed to believe that he “miss-spoke?” I maintain that he knew exactly what he was saying and meant it. He is not sorry he said it; he’s only sorry that it was recorded.

Kerry’s comments are outrageous and hurtful on several levels.

1. Apartheid conjures up a hateful, bigoted period in South Africa’s history during which time blacks, “colored people,” Asians, and women were subjected to the most despicable, dehumanizing treatment one can imagine. Any objective person who is familiar with Apartheid has to be appalled by the comparison to Israel, which, in fact, is the only true democracy in the Middle East.

2. The comments signal a bias against Israel in favor of the Palestinians. The Palestinians now have confirmation that the US is exasperated with Israel’s negotiating position and is more likely to blame them if the talks fail. They have “cover” for taking a hard-line in the negotiations. The negotiations were hard enough before as there are many complicated issues to resolve including recognizing Israel’s right to exist as a legitimate state and the Palestinians’ close ties with various terrorists groups. This just made it harder and less likely that they will succeed.

3. Most importantly, this is not an isolated incident for the Obama Administration. It is consistent with their attitude for the last six years. The Obama Administration has seemed more intent on placating terrorist organizations, such as al Qaeda, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and rogue states such as Iran and Syria than supporting its longstanding ally, Israel. They may think they are being evenhanded, but I don’t see it that way. They don’t seem to understand that these entities have tried to destroy us and will continue to do so. They consider us the “Great Satan.” We are “non-believers,” Judeo-Christian, not Muslim. They are not our friends and never will be, regardless of how hard we try and how many concessions we grant them. They are still fighting the Crusades 1,000 years after the fact. Just last week, in fact, the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas announced he is seeking a reconciliation deal with Hamas. How can the US expect Israel to negotiate with an organization that is cozying up to Hamas, which has repeatedly stated that its goal is the destruction of the State of Israel?

4. President Obama has made it clear that he considers Israel’s intransigence to be the main cause of the failure of the peace negotiations to date. Additionally, he has signaled that if the talks break down the US may no longer be able to protect and support Israel. What is the justification for that comment! Mr. Obama has called Mr. Abbas a man of peace. Furthermore, he has commended Abbas as someone who has “consistently renounced violence” and is seeking a “diplomatic and peaceful solution.” (How does that square with Abbas’ courting of Hamas?)

CONCLUSION AND PREDICTION

The Obama Administration has not been and is not a friend to Israel. At best, it has been neutral. At times, it has been hostile. Actions speak louder than words. On the other hand, its attitude toward Iran and Syria has been conciliatory and “wishy-washy.” The US and Israel have a symbiotic relationship. Israel needs the US’s strong, unwavering support. Ultimately, the US is the only nation it can count on. Similarly, the US needs Israel. It is the only ally in the Middle East that it count on. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama and Mr. Netanyahu have a very strained relationship. You may recall that Mr. Obama chose not to meet with Mr. Netanyahu when he was in NY for meetings at the UN. That was a real “slap in the face.” Mr. Netanyahu, for his part, does not trust Mr. Obama, and with good reason.

This has clearly been the least supportive Administration, even worse than Jimmy Carter’s. Mr. Kerry’s Apartheid comment fit right in.

I say to American Jews, wake up. Why continue to support an Administration that has this kind of attitude toward Jews, in general, and Israel, in particular? Why continue to support an Administration that cozies up to terrorist organizations that have repeatedly sought to attack us? Why continue to support the current Democratic Administration just because you have always favored the Democratic Party. You are smarter than that; at least, I hope you are. Send the Dems a message in November. Jews are not automatons. We will not blindly continue to support an Administration that does not support Israel.