His first stumble occurred early in his administration when he failed to support his nomination of former U.S. Ambassador Charles Freemen to the post of intelligence czar when he was challenged and smeared by the Israeli lobby. That was a bad sign. Ambassador Freeman was an excellent choice and his views on Israel, while critical, were mainstream. Unquestioning admiration of Israel should not be a mandatory qualification for holding office in this country. Nonetheless, Israel’s veto caused Ambassador Freeman to withdraw, with little or no support or objection from the Obama administration.
The second stumble occurred after President Obama had quite properly insisted that all illegal settlement building by the Israelis stop, immediately and entirely. This long-overdue action predictably caused an uproar in the Israeli lobby and in Congress, the dependable right arm of the lobby. Instead of standing his ground, the President backed down after the Israelis offered a partial and leaky farce of a 10 month moratorium on illegal settlement building which excluded East Jerusalem and 3000 already approved building permits for West Bank illegal settlements.
The final and most embarrassing stumble occurred this past week when Prime Minister Netanyahu refused repeated administration requests to extend the partial freeze of illegal settlement building for even a few months to allow negotiations with the Palestinians to proceed. Instead of using all the power available to a U.S. president to force Netanyahu to extend the freeze, Mr. Obama instead decided to bribe Mr. Netanyahu with a huge package of diplomatic, political and U.S.-funded additional military equipment commitments to Israel. So far, that ludicrously one-sided bride has been rejected by Mr. Netanyahu.
Deferring to the Europeans on the Israeli-Palestinian issue would have several advantages for the U.S., and for the negotiation process: It would reduce the political pressure of this issue on the U.S. and the Obama administration. It would undermine the ability of Israel and its U.S. lobby to manipulate and control the issue through its excessive influence on the U.S. mainstream media and Congress.
ReplyDeleteGreat idea, but I would bet Israel would reject, at least under the current government, any involvement in negotiations that did not have a U.S. veto. If Obama had any political courage, he would wash his hands of the whole mess and turn it over to the Europeans. As long as the American Congress has any influence on this process, nothing will be achieved.
It would just mean more "donations" for European politicians and less for US politicians. Then you could witness the rapid growth in Euro politicos' affection for Israel and their increasing outrage at the Palestinian terrorists (or Palestinians as we now call them).
ReplyDeleteBy the way, have the Israelis selected a White House chief of staff to replace Rahm Emanuel? Alan Dershowitz perhaps.
Tsk, Tsk. Are you saying even European politicians can be bought? But I thought the Europeans were supposed to be so much more enlightened than Americans?
ReplyDelete<span>By the way, have the Israelis selected a White House chief of staff to replace Rahm Emanuel? Alan Dershowitz perhaps.</span>
:-D Good suggestion.
<span>.</span>
"An honest politician is one who, when bought, stays bought." Simon Cameron, secretary to "Honest Abe" Lincoln. Apologies if I've posted that before, it's a personal favourite and I tend to overuse it.
ReplyDelete