Today's speech by President Obama will either strengthen the ties between Israel and the United States or break them. I think the latter will be the result. However, can Israel exist without its big brother or will this result in a break this is reconcilable?
In his speech today at the State Department among other topics, President Obama introduced his requirement which starts (not ends) with Israel retreating to pre-1967 borders. If taken literally, that would mean that Jerusalem would no longer be under Israeli administration but would be returned to Jordanian hands. If this would occur, the Western Wall would be off-limits to Jews (as it was before 1967) and those Jews who have purchased apartments in Jerusalem would have to be relocated which is similar to what ooccurred in Gaza. Can any Israeli government survive when it gives up Jerusalem for peace? I do not think so.
Additionally,Samaria and Judea would be made part of the Palestinian State and those developments would also be abandoned. Would these inhabitants leave peacefully? I doubt it.
It appears to this observer that Netnayahu has a real problem. Does he upset Washington (Obama) by telling the President tomorrow that he will not go along with this proposal or does he upset Israel by caving into the demands set out by the President. Initial press releases seem to indicate the prior will be the answer. I would love to be a fly on the wall to hear the give and take, however, it will not be a pleasant meeting for either side.
My observations of President Obama tell me that he will not take the Israeli Prime Minister's reluctance to accept the proposal as a positive. Unless Bibbi changes his mind, I expect a Chicago-like response such as the following:
1. In any upcoming armed conflict, the United States WILL NOT support Israel in any way. No military hardware, no dollars, no support in the UN.
2. Over the next 2 years (which could be more or less), foreign aid to Israel will be cut to zero
3. Any incursion into Palestinian areas will not be supported. The US will not block any actions by the Security Council and will allow the UN to "protect" the Palestinians under the "obligation to protect" provisions used to justify the UN's actions in Libya. (This could result in UN troops being interjected into Israel and legal actions being taken against the Israeli leaders by the World Court.)
4. Should Bibbi still not agree, the final hammer will be that the United States will go to the UN and have Israel declared a pariah nation (like Iraq, Iran or South Africa during apartheid) and ask for censure and penalties. After this is done, American citizens will be prohibited by Federal Law to send any money to Israel.
If he does this successfully, Obama will have completely isolated Israel which would leave it vulnerable to attack from its hostile neighbors. Would the attack be successful? Could Israel survive such an attack? Would other US Congressional leaders intervene and resume the aid? All good questions, I hope we do not have to get the answers.
The State Department has never been a friend of Israel so this is a major victory for them. For the first time since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, they are close to getting this tiny country on the ropes. They must be ecstatic. They now have a President who sees the world the same way they do. A world without Israel.
Where do you stand? With Israel or with the State Department and President Obama? Will Obama really drop the hammer? Or am I just a worry wart?
Let's discuss it.
In his speech today at the State Department among other topics, President Obama introduced his requirement which starts (not ends) with Israel retreating to pre-1967 borders. If taken literally, that would mean that Jerusalem would no longer be under Israeli administration but would be returned to Jordanian hands. If this would occur, the Western Wall would be off-limits to Jews (as it was before 1967) and those Jews who have purchased apartments in Jerusalem would have to be relocated which is similar to what ooccurred in Gaza. Can any Israeli government survive when it gives up Jerusalem for peace? I do not think so.
Additionally,Samaria and Judea would be made part of the Palestinian State and those developments would also be abandoned. Would these inhabitants leave peacefully? I doubt it.
It appears to this observer that Netnayahu has a real problem. Does he upset Washington (Obama) by telling the President tomorrow that he will not go along with this proposal or does he upset Israel by caving into the demands set out by the President. Initial press releases seem to indicate the prior will be the answer. I would love to be a fly on the wall to hear the give and take, however, it will not be a pleasant meeting for either side.
My observations of President Obama tell me that he will not take the Israeli Prime Minister's reluctance to accept the proposal as a positive. Unless Bibbi changes his mind, I expect a Chicago-like response such as the following:
1. In any upcoming armed conflict, the United States WILL NOT support Israel in any way. No military hardware, no dollars, no support in the UN.
2. Over the next 2 years (which could be more or less), foreign aid to Israel will be cut to zero
3. Any incursion into Palestinian areas will not be supported. The US will not block any actions by the Security Council and will allow the UN to "protect" the Palestinians under the "obligation to protect" provisions used to justify the UN's actions in Libya. (This could result in UN troops being interjected into Israel and legal actions being taken against the Israeli leaders by the World Court.)
4. Should Bibbi still not agree, the final hammer will be that the United States will go to the UN and have Israel declared a pariah nation (like Iraq, Iran or South Africa during apartheid) and ask for censure and penalties. After this is done, American citizens will be prohibited by Federal Law to send any money to Israel.
If he does this successfully, Obama will have completely isolated Israel which would leave it vulnerable to attack from its hostile neighbors. Would the attack be successful? Could Israel survive such an attack? Would other US Congressional leaders intervene and resume the aid? All good questions, I hope we do not have to get the answers.
The State Department has never been a friend of Israel so this is a major victory for them. For the first time since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, they are close to getting this tiny country on the ropes. They must be ecstatic. They now have a President who sees the world the same way they do. A world without Israel.
Where do you stand? With Israel or with the State Department and President Obama? Will Obama really drop the hammer? Or am I just a worry wart?
Let's discuss it.
You are a worry wart. My guess is that nothing of significance will come out of this. In September, the Palestinians will then try to get U.N. recognition as an independent state. The U.S. will veto their petition in the Security Council, and the stalemate continues. Wanna bet?
ReplyDeleteIn the interest of journalistic accuracy, you should have said that Obama's proposal was that some "land swaps" would be part of deal in going back to the 1967 border, and that the Jerusalem and refugee issues would be held off for a later negotiation.
--David