Americans concerned about Iran

New poll shows that Americans are pro-Israel especially, but American-centric
Nov. 16, 2008

While Americans generally support Israel under many circumstances, a new bi-partisan poll conducted by Public Opinion Strategies and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and commissioned by The Israel Project, shows that the driving support for Israel is based on shared values, but mostly a fear of an Iranian threat. Some highlights:

• 72 percent say "even with all the problems that America faces at home now, we must still work hard to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons"
• 66 percent say America should be a supporter of Israel and only 6 percent say America should be a supporter of the Palestinians
• Recent news has made close to two-thirds of Americans more concerned about Iran
• While economic issues top the list of American concerns, it does not dampen voters’ wishes to stand with Israel and to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.
  

Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, founder and president of The Israel Project, said she was encouraged that "depsite the economic crisis, people are still willing to stand up on the issue of Iran,” which she labeled as the "seurity issue of the decade."

However, the results also show that American support is based on American, not Israeli, interests. The Israeli-Palestinian issue was fourth on a list of foreign policy concerns. Americans worried that Iran could give nuclear weapons to terror groups hostile to or already in the United States or that it could create more economic unrest.

"Voters supporting Obama as well as McCain all find Iran with nuclear weapons to be a grave threat to the US and feel the need to work hard to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons,” said Stanley Greenberg, PhD of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research.

It seems, however, that American support of Israel tends to be as that of a preliminary shield for the United States, especially when it comes to Iran.

Hamas say 'dig this' as Gaza heats up again

Flimsy cease-fire spiraling into new round of violence
Nov. 16, 2008

All of a sudden we are back to pre-cease-fire days in the South of Israel. Throughout the "cease-fire" Hamas continued to fire sporadic rockets from the Gaza Strip. But this last weekend, two dozen rockets pounded the Sderot area and Ashkelon. An 80-year-old woman was injured and several Israelis were treated for shock. Defense officials said at least two of the rockets were Grad missiles. Israel responded with an air strike that four Palestinians as they were trying to fire homemade rockets.

This latest round of violence between Israel and Hamas has left 15 Palestinians dead and the five-month-old truce on life support. The truce came into effect on June 19.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert placed the entirety of the blame on Hamas and hinted at retaliation from Israel: "We cannot tolerate the price that the terrorist organizations are trying to set for the prevailing situation there. It is our right to prevent further terrorism, threats and the breaking of the calm that is harming – first and foremost – the residents of the area."

Hamas has been using its time during the 'cease-fire' (or more accurately translated as 'calm') wisely though. Earlier this month, the Israeli army uncovered a tunnel on the border with Gaza meant for kidnapping soldiers. According to the Foreign Affairs Ministry:

The force successfully located a structure, under which a tunnel, designed to enable the immediate abduction of IDF soldiers, had been dug. During the operation, armed terrorists inside the structure opened fire at the IDF forces. The forces returned fire and identified positively hitting a number of them. Two IDF soldiers were moderately wounded and two were lightly injured.

"The rules regarding Gaza are clear: If there is calm and the time is not utilized to prepare the next attack - there will be calm in return," said Vice Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. "But if Israeli citizens are attacked - Israel will respond forcefully in order to protect them. Israel is not interested in deterioration, but we won't put up with recurring violations of the calm. The other side must understand that there are times when Israel must say 'enough is enough'."

Israel security expert: Obama’s policies “worry me a great deal”

The Iran theories
Nov. 16, 2008

Talk to Israelis about the effect of an Obama presidency for Israel and they'll tell you there are many theories.

The first is that Israel is preparing to attack before prez-elect Obama legally ascends to office. After all, why else is the outgoing (not in the extrovert sense) Prime Minister Ehud Olmert going to visit the lame-duck President GWB? Not to say shalom, presumably. Both leaders, going out with low approval ratings, would benefit from a boost by some James-Bond move to enhance their ratings.

I know I said 'many theories,' but no one ever gets past the one, almost as if it is a foregone conclusion. I don't know if there are any other theories actually. I guess it sounds more educated to say 'several' but then stop at the only actual one. 'The one' (not to be confused with Barack Obama himself) is discussed ad infinitum.

Israeli security experts say that with Obama at the helm of American politics, the Jewish state faces a grave situation with a nuclear Iran. Director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center Barry Rubin said he is worried about Obama’s stated intention that he will “conciliate" with his enemies means he will drop his friends.

"That worries me a great deal,” Rubin said, adding that Obama's stance on Iran is an “extremely serious strategic challenge which affects 20 countries or more.”

“We have every reason to believe that (Obama) will take a relatively soft approach whether or not he holds direct negotiations or indirect negotiations” Iran, he said. “We cannot expect that he will take a tougher line on sanctions and pressures and that he will not persuade Tehran that he’s going to do so. This will have a predictable affect that the Iranians are going to push ahead on nuclear weapons as fast as they have with much less concern over consequences.”

Indeed, while Israeli leaders expressed congratulations and optimism regarding Obama in the press, security sources say behind the scenes there was a bit more concern as to the ramifications of his conciliation with Iran.

Even Foreign Minsiter Tzipi Livni publicly intoned dissonance with Obama’s readiness to talk to Iran, which would be perceived in the Middle East as a sign of weakness, she said.

“We live in a neighborhood in which sometimes dialogue--in a situation where you have brought sanctions, and you then shift to dialogue-- is liable to be interpreted as weakness,” Livni said. Asked if she supported US dialogue with Iran, Livni replied: “The answer is no.”

Most Israelis, and Palestinians for that matter, say that the Palestinian-Israeli situation is not likely to be affected by any American president. However, just today a news report quoted the prez-elect as favoring the 1967 borders in a peace agreement. The ‘67 borders essentially push Israel out of the Old City and leaves Jewish institutions like Hebrew University and Hadassah Hospital on the Palestinian side. It also cuts off families from each other plus brings West Jerusalem to the front line of rockets and snipers. This certainly doesn’t make him more left-wing than Israeli leaders. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and President Shimon Peres already added their support to it as well. THis stems from the "Saudi initiative."

At the UN last week, Peres lauded the idea and was applauded when he told King Abdullah “I wish that your voice will become the prevailing voice of the whole region, of all people.”