Soros and the Future of Israel

The world is losing its collective sense.  The UNs imposition of the no-fly zone over Libya and President Obama's commitment of military assets and personnel without formally informing Congress are leading the world to enforce a new policy what is now known as "Responsibility to Protect." Under this new philosophy, the United Nations actively defends those who, in their opinion cannot defend themselves.

At present, it is the Libyan rebels.  How long will it be before the target of the United Nations will be Israel? Already, Israel is the most censured country by the UN, more than Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Darfur, Egypt, Bahrain or any despotic country.  So when does the next step occur? The event that will trigger the response could be Israel's response to rocket attacks that strike and kill dozens or multiple bombers attacking several locations at once.  Regardless of the event, it will be painted as if the "poor, unarmed Palestinians" cannot stand up to the modern Israeli army and that actions must be taken to protect them.

Any even handed person knows that this policy will only end in tragedy but the world does not look at Israel that way. So why is the world heading this way?  There is only one reason. The world has always hated Jews and this is just the latest chapter.

Here is the story:


 Turkey's Deputy Prime Minister calls for bombing of Israel


Ed Lasky - American Thinker, March 21st, 2011

Turkey's Deputy Prime Minister has called for the bombing of Israel.

Michael Rubin reports at Commentary Contentions

After assuring both Libyans and Turks that Turkey was not involved in air strikes on Libya, Deputy Prime Minister Bülent Arınç, of Turkey, said, “We wish that the United Nations had made such resolutions and countries had taken action in the face of incidents in Gaza, Palestine and the other regions.

This is exactly the problem I thought might arise from President Obama's endorsement of the trendy principle of “Responsibility to Protect”. In yesterday's blog, “The Rise of Samantha Power and the risks for the American-Israel relationship,” I speculated that the rationale Obama adopted to bomb Libya bore the risks of others adopting the same “principle” to justify punishing, if not bombing, Israel.



I wrote:

It is not hard to envision that this R2P concept, swirling through the United Nations and in international foreign policy circles, can one day be applied against Israel when that nation is forced to respond from attacks coming from the West Bank, Gaza, and Lebanon. Terrorists hide behind civilians; Israeli actions to defend themselves often happen in densely populated areas where civilian deaths are almost inevitable – despite all the precautions Israel takes to prevent them.

And noted Omri Ceren's excellent analysis of the history of this amorphous concept of the Responsibility to Protect and how it has already been used to criticize Israel. It seems that adversaries of Israel are eager to apply this concept to attack Israel, metaphorically and diplomatically, if not militarily (yet).

Barack Obama listened not to Congress but to the Arab League, the United Nations, and people like Samantha Power to launch military attacks. But he has also opened a Pandora's Box by endorsing the Responsibility to Protect as an international norm that can be used to justify attacks by those the so-called ” international community” consider to be threatening civilians.

This is yet another irresponsible action by Barack Obama – one that bears with it the risk of being used to justify all sorts of mischief in the years ahead.

I also found it quite interesting that George Soros – a huge supporter of Barack Obama's campaign, funds efforts to promote Responsibility to Protect as an international norm. Samantha Power (who heavily influenced Obama to launch attacks on Libya) also is a supporter of the R2P movement and played a key role at a think tank (The International Crisis Group) heavily funded by George Soros.

The ties that bind.