Mar 16, 2009

More dismal thoughts on the new admin’s Israel tack

Obama has, in essence, turned on Israel
March 16 2009

In a New York Post editorial, John Bolton, the former U.N. Ambassador, notes how the Obama administration’s pressure on Israel to find a solution to the Israeli-Arab dispute is another sign of America’s slow abandonment of the Jewish state.

Bolton explains why:
Almost invariably, Israel is the loser -- because Israel is the party most dependent on the United States, most subject to U.S. pressure and most susceptible to the inevitable chorus of received wisdom from Western diplomats, media and the intelligentsia demanding concessions. When pressure must be applied to make compromises, it's always easier to pressure the more reasonable side.

How will diplomatic pressure work to change Hamas or Hezbollah, where even military force has so far failed? If anything, one can predict coming pressure on Israel to acknowledge the legitimacy of these two terrorist groups, and to negotiate with them as equals. ...

Why would America subject a close ally to this dynamic, playing with the security of an unvarying supporter in world affairs? For America, Israel's intelligence-sharing, military cooperation and significant bilateral economic ties, among many others, are important national-security assets that should not lightly be put at risk.

The only understandable answer is that the Obama administration believes that Israel is as much or more of a problem as it is an ally, at least until Israel's disagreements with its neighbors are resolved. Instead of seeing Israel as a national-security asset, the administration likely sees a relationship complicating its broader policy of diplomatic 'outreach.'

No comments: