Obama v Israel

Custom Search

 

  

Obama is no friend of Israel
 

   

 


help fight the media
  
 

 

 

 

 
Items on this page are archived in the order of discovery.

Obama Says No To Israel

Jim Hoft says that Obama has refused all Israeli military requests since entering office in 2009, reminding us that last week Obama refused to have his picture taken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. There were reports that he refused to dine with Netanyahu, too. But, his angst against Israel does not stop there.

The World Tribune reported that officials said the U.S. Defense Department and Israeli Defense Ministry concluded an agreement that would enable the sale of at least three C-130J Super Hercules aircraft to Israel.

They said the agreement was signed in Washington on March 24 but has not been announced.

"There is a signed agreement," an official said. "The announcement requires a political decision."

Under the accord, Israel would be able to purchase three C-130Js from manufacturer Lockheed Martin. The agreement called for an option of another six air transports for a total value of $1.9 billion. The Israeli request for the Super Hercules had been approved by the administration of then-President George W. Bush in 2007.

The administration of President Barack Obama has refused to approve any of Israelís military requests since it entered office in January 2009. The Pentagon did not announce any weapons contracts to Israel over the last 14 months.

Israel was expected to receive its first C-130J in 2013, officials said. They said the next step would be to sign a contract with Lockheed Martin, which has been processing requests from such Middle East countries as Iraq, Oman and Tunisia.

Obama Administration Won't Rule Out Firing on Israeli Jets
Jim Hoft draws our attention to another warning -- the Obama Administration won't rule out firing on Israeli jets if Iran is attacked.
    

America's top military officer wouldn't rule the possibility today of U.S. forces firing on Israeli jets, if Israel launched a pre-emptive strike on Iran.

In a town hall on the campus of the University of West Virginia, a young Air Force ROTC cadet asked Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen to respond to a "rumor."  If Israel decided to attack Iran, the speculation went, those jet would need to fly through Iraqi airspace to reach their targets.  That airspace is considered a "no-fly" zone by the American military.  So might U.S. troops shoot down the Israeli jets, the airmen asked the chairman, if they breached that airspace?

Mullen tried to sidestep the question.  "We have an exceptionally strong relationship with Israel.  I've spent a lot of time with my counterpart in Israel.  So we also have a very clear understanding of where we are.  And beyond that, I just wouldn't get into the speculation of what might happen and who might do what.  I don't think it serves a purpose, frankly," he said.  "I am hopeful that this will be resolved in a way where we never have to answer a question like that."

    
This isn't the first time we've heard this.

Last September, Zbigniew Brzezinski, former foreign adviser to US president Jimmy Carter and current advisor to Barack Obama, called for the US to shoot down Israeli jets.
Netanyahu To Obama:  Pound Sand
Ed Morrissey says Benjamin Netanyahu delivered an unequivocal message to the Obama administration this morning, rejecting completely a call from Barack Obama to stop building settlements in Jerusalem.  The rejection creates a standoff between the two traditional allies in the region and all but halts Obama's efforts to force Israel back to the bargaining table (via JWF):
    

Aides to Israel's prime minister said Thursday that he has officially rejected Barack Obama's demand to suspend all construction in contested east Jerusalem, a move that threatens to entrench a year-old deadlock in Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking.

The aides said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered his government's position to Obama over the weekend, ahead of the scheduled arrival later Thursday of Obama's special Mideast envoy, George Mitchell.  They spoke on condition of anonymity because the contact between the two leaders was private.

Washington had put Mitchell's shuttle diplomacy on hold for more than a month as it awaited a reply from Israel.  Aides to Netanyahu provided no information on whether the Israeli leader had offered any other concessions to the Palestinians in an effort to restart the long-stalled talks.

    
The AP sounds almost disbelieving in reporting this, adding in this odd paragraph:
    

But with Israel eager to ease tensions with its closest and most important ally, it appeared likely the Jewish state tempered its rejection with other confidence building gestures toward the Palestinians.

    
Really?  "It appeared likely" isn't even rumor-mongering.  It's complete fantasy by the writer.  Nothing in the article reports on "gestures," confidence-building or otherwise, and AP reporter Amy Teibel doesn't provide even an anonymous source for the reporting.  It's nonsensical spin aimed at somehow keeping this from becoming an abject diplomatic failure by Barack Obama.

Netanyahu just taught Obama a lesson, which is that a nation that has been surrounded by terrorists and other enemies for decades isn't going to be intimidated by an Ivory Tower academic, even if he sits in the Oval Office.  After Obama's shameful treatment of Netanyahu on his visit to Washington DC, he could hardly have expected any better response.  Instead of cowing Netanyahu into submission, Obama has alienated him -- and as a side effect, made Netanyahu more popular at home because of it.

That's what makes Teibel's reporting so disingenuous.  If Netanyahu was so eager to "ease tensions" with Obama, he would have found some sort of face-saving compromise for his ally.  Instead, Netanyahu just told Obama to pound sand.

Related: Poll -- 65 percent of Americans disagree with how Obama is handling Israel according to a Quinnipiac University survey.
PLO Wants Obama To "Impose" Solution
Sweetness & Light is reporting that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas urged the Obama administration on Saturday to impose a solution to the Middle East conflict that would give his people an independent state.

"Mr. President (Barack Obama) and members of the American administration, since you believe in this (an independent Palestinian state), it is your duty to take steps toward a solution and to impose this solution," Abbas said in a speech.

Abbas made the remarks to members of his Fatah party in the West Bank city of Ramallah a day after talks there with Obama's Middle East envoy.

"We've asked them (the Obama administration) more than once: 'Impose a solution'," Abbas said.

Abbas's appeal to Obama came amid widespread media reports that he was considering floating a proposal that would set the contours of a final peace deal.

Any such move would likely be opposed by Israel, which says only negotiations can secure a final settlement to the conflict.

Obama has been sharply at odds with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over Israeli settlement construction in the occupied West Bank, land Palestinians want for their state, and in East Jerusalem, which Abbas wants as a future capital.
Signals Of Weakness
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said Tuesday that Barack Obama has encouraged Israelís enemies by sending "signals of weakness" in the U.S. commitment to its ally.

"We have to ask if the Obama administration remains committed to the state of Israel and the right of Israel to exist and defend herself," Bachmann told POLITICO.  "The Obama administration, through its word and its actions, has been sending the world mixed signals at best."

Bachmannís criticism came a day after a raid by Israeli commandos aboard a ship headed for Gaza turned violent.  Nine pro-Palestinian activists were killed, prompting condemnation of the raid by Turkey and other Islamic countries.

After reviewing a video tape, Bachmann insisted that the commandos who dropped onto the ship from helicopters were attacked by the activists.  "Yet, Israel is being called upon to apologize," she said.

While the incident sparked outrage around the world, the administration has been cautious in its response -- which Bachmann argued sends an unmistakable signal of its own.

Obama has demonstrated "less than clear, full support for the state of Israel," Bachmann said.  "Now Israelís detractors act as though Israel has no friends.  Ö Itís more important now than ever that the Obama administration and the United States are committed to the state of Israel."

"It appears that from the time the Obama administration came into office they have been stepping away from Israel," she said.

Bachmann pointed to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahuís March visit to the White House, where he was perceived to have been coolly received by Obama, as a key moment in the deteriorating relationship between the two countries.

"Some of those signals havenít gone unnoticed by Israelís detractors and aggressors.  Those signals of weakness in coming to Israelís defense will only lead to further aggression," the congresswoman said.  "That hasnít led to peace.  That was an unwise decision, and I think this weekend shows how that has played out."
"Peace Activists" Were Al Qaeda Mercenaries
Jonatan Urich says that in a special meeting of the Israeli Security Cabinet it was disclosed that a group of 40 people on board the Mavi Marmara with no identification papers belong to Al Qaeda.

According to intelligence disclosed during that meeting, the terrorists wore bullet-proof vests, and carried with them night-vision goggles, weapons, and a package of cash.  While the civilian protestors were sent to the lower deck during the Shayetet Naval Special Force's interception of the ship, the group divided into cells and remained on the upper deck in order to attack the soldiers.

An announcement delivered at the completion of this special meeting stated that blocking the entrance of these ships into Gaza is an act of self defense.  The Cabinet places full responsibility for the incident on those who started the violence which clearly endangered the lives of the IDF soldiers, and commends the IDF for the way it responded.  The meeting on this subject will continue on Wednesday (June 2).

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during the meeting that he regrets all loss of life, but gives full support to the IDF.  "This was not a flotilla for peace, but instead was a violent and organized force.  We have films and photographs which show what our soldiers faced, but the last thing that can be said about this ship is that it was a flotilla of peace," he said.

"We know from the experience of Operation Cast Lead, and beforehand, that weapons entering the Gaza Strip are used against our civilians.  Within Gaza there is a terror state aided by Iran, and therefore we attempt to prevent the entering of weapons to Gaza by land, air and sea.  On the Francop ship alone we caught approximately 200 tons of weapons which were smuggled by Iran to Hezbollah," he added.

The Prime Minister emphasized that "Opening a maritime channel to Gaza will present a grave danger to the security of our civilians.  Therefore we are upholding the policies of the maritime blockade, and check the ships.  There is no possibility to establish these policies without checking the contents of the ships.  It is true that there is international pressure on and criticism of this policy, but we must understand that it is necessary in order to ensure the security of Israel and her right to self defense."
Obama To Netanyahu: Go Home
Hillel Fendel says that in the hubbub surrounding the "battle of the flotilla," Netanyahuís quick reversal of his decision to remain in the United States has been largely ignored.  It turns out that Obama told him to leave because he didnít want Netanyahu to use the White House as a stage on which to present Israelís side of the story.

The flotilla violence caught Netanyahu in the midst of a diplomatic trip to North America.  He was in the Canadian capital of Ottawa at the time, about to leave for Washington for a meeting with Barack Obama.  The meeting was to have been a way for Obama to make up for the humiliation he dealt Netanyahu on his last visit, when he refused to be seen with the Israeli leader in public.

Netanyahu announced immediately after the flotilla news broke that he would remain in North America and would meet with Obama as scheduled.  However, within minutes after media reported Netanyahu would continue with his trip as scheduled, he abruptly announced a change of plan and set off immediately for Israel to "deal with the flotilla crisis."

Behind the scenes, it was Obama officials who caused the turnabout.  Globes cites sources in both Jerusalem and Washington who say that Obama officials gave a clear message to Netanyahuís people: "Donít come."

Officials in both Washington and Jerusalem deny that this was the case.

Some sources said that it was precisely the high-profile nature of the visit that scared the Americans.  The White House did not wish Obama to be seen sharing the stage with the leader of the country that was under international attack for having "attacked peace activists."

Netanyahu, for his part, was looking forward to explaining to the world from Washington that the violent activists on the boat in question were "terror activists" with ties to Hamas and Al-Qaeda, who attempted to lynch the minimally-armed soldiers as they rappelled down down their helicopter.

Obama's actions, or lack thereof, are setting the stage for war in the Near East, Iran, and the Koreas.  He's a pushover, and our enemies know it.
Birds Of A feather


    

John Hinderaker says Helen Thomas has been a White House correspondent for decades; how many decades, I can't even guess.  She is a hard-core left-winger who thinks Barack Obama is nowhere near radical enough.  She is also, frankly, an idiot, and has been humored by White House press secretaries for about as long as I have been alive.

 

Thomas revealed her lunacy once again last week, when she confided that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and go "home" to Germany and Poland.  Click the image to view the video; as usual, Thomas gives hags a bad name.

 

Someone should remind the old Arab that there ain't no such place as "Palestine."

Obamaís Flotilla, Obamaís War
Gary Bauer says the flotilla of boats intercepted by Israel this week flew the Turkish flag and was paid for by a "charity" deeply implicated in Islamic terrorism.  But the "captain" of the fleet was none other than Barack Obama.

From the day he took the oath of office eighteen arduous months ago, Obama has followed a Middle East foreign policy thatís been as hostile toward Israel as itís been hospitable toward the Islamic world.

Over those months Obama has seldom showed anger toward rogue Muslim governments -- not toward the appalling human rights abuses of the genocidal Bashir regime in Sudan.  Not toward the government of Iran as it pursues its nuclear weapons program.

Obama refused "to meddle" in Iranís affairs after the deadly crackdown against protestors following the Islamic Republicís sham elections.  But he was described as "seething" with anger only moments after hearing about a routine decision by Jerusalemís municipal government to authorize housing units in a well established Jewish neighborhood.

The administrationís latest betrayal of Israel came a couple days before the flotilla episode, when the U.S. joined an international conference that singled out Israel -- not Iran -- to renounce its nuclear weapons.

From Tehran to Ankara, from Damascus to Beirut, radical Islamists have read the signals as well.  They see Obama as weak and they know he feels no bond with Israel.  They sense opportunity.  That is why missiles are being launched from Gaza again, why Hezbollah says it is yearning for war, why Syria has rejected every U.S. overture and why Iranís Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatens a second Holocaust.

"Mr. Obama, you are a newcomer.  Wait until your sweat dries and get some experience," Ahmadinejad taunted Obama ahead of his nuclear summit in D. C. two months ago.

Obamaís "Itís-Better-To-Be-Loved-Than-Feared" foreign policy also explains why Turkey, a U.S. ally and NATO member, allowed the flotilla to be launched.  Did Obama even try to convince Turkey to stop the ships?  Did he object when Turkey signed a nuclear deal with Iran two weeks ago?

No.

Continue reading here . . .
Investigate This
From Scott at PowerLine blog:  Bill Kristol reports that senior Obama administration officials have been telling foreign governments that the administration intends to support an effort next week at the United Nations to set up an independent commission, under UN auspices, to investigate Israel's behavior in the Gaza flotilla incident.  Bill comments that the White House has apparently shrugged off concerns from elsewhere in the U.S. government that:   a) this is an extraordinary singling out of Israel, since all kinds of much worse incidents happen around the world without spurring UN investigations; b) that the investigation will be one-sided, focusing entirely on Israeli behavior and not on Turkey or on Hamas; and c) that this sets a terrible precedent for outside investigations of incidents involving U.S. troops or intelligence operatives as we conduct our own war on terror.  The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its unerring instinct for opposing friends and supporting enemies.

Kristol's report comes just as Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has informed Israel's representatives the world over that there were never any humanitarian supplies or equipment aboard the Mavi Marmara, where Israeli commandos were ambushed by armed mercenaries posing as peace activists.  Of related interest are the videotaped statements of two Mavi Marmara crew members showing that preparations for a violent confrontation with IDF forces were put in motion about two hours before the boarding began, when the Israeli Navy hailed the ship and told it to halt; according to the statements, the atmosphere aboard the Mavi Marmara; IHH operatives on the main deck were cutting the ship's railings with metal disks they had brought with them into lengths suitable to be used as clubs.

Despite outward appearances, the Obama administration is not clueless.  It has plenty of clues.  Let's just say now is a good time to meditate further on Dorothy Rabinowitz's Wall Street Journal column on "The alien in the White House."

UPDATE:  The Standard has posted the White House response to Kristol's report here.  Senators Reid and McConnell have in addition circulated a joint letter to Obama for signature by their colleagues.  The letter raises the role of the IHH in the incident and recommends investigation of the IHH for inclusion among the designated state sponsors of terror.  The letter further states: "[W]e ask you to stand firm in the future at the United Nations Security Council and to use your veto power, if necessary, to prevent any similar biased or one-sided resolutions [such as the UN Human Rights Council's] from passing."
What Was Obama Thinking?
Surveying the wreckage of the middle east peace talks, Paul Mirengoff believes Barry Rubin asked an excellent question in connection with Obama's recent push for an agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority:
    

Knowing that it was unlikely he would get a full continuation of the freeze [on Israeli settlement construction] and that the Palestinian Authority was eager to get out of negotiations, why did Obama put so much of his prestige on success; give himself unnecessary self-imposed impossible deadlines; make a breakthrough seem relatively likely and easy (despite giving lip service to the difficulties); and magnify the issue's importance so that a failure seemed all the worse?

    
For Rubin, the primary answer is incompetence.  This is an explanation Mirengoff almost always resists in these kinds of situations as facile and demeaning to people more accomplished than me.

But Rubin exhausts the force of explanations Mirengoff generally find more plausible -- political calculation, ideology, arrogance, and the desire to posture -- without providing a fully satisfactory answer to his question.  So Mirengoff is inclined to agree that incompetence was also at play.
Israelis and Palestinians Both Blame Obama
Ed Morrissey says it isnít often that one man can bring the Israelis and Palestinians together, but Barack Obama has managed the near-impossible, according to Ben Smith at Politico.  Obama hasnít brought them any closer to peace -- just the opposite, in fact.  But at least theyíre both blaming the same guy:

Vowing to change a region that has resisted the best efforts of presidents and prime ministers past, Barack Obama dove head first into the Middle East peace process on his second day in office.

He was supposed to be different.  His personal identity, his momentum, his charisma and his promise of a fresh start would fundamentally alter Americaís relations with the Muslim world and settle one of its bitterest grievances.

Two years later, he has managed to forge surprising unanimity on at least one topic: Barack Obama.  A visit here finds both Israelis and Palestinians blame him for the current stalemate -- just as they blame one another.

Instead of becoming a heady triumph of his diplomatic skill and special insight, Obamaís peace process is viewed almost universally in Israel as a mistake-riddled fantasy. Ö

Even those who still believe in the process that Obama has championed view his conduct as a deeply unfunny comedy of errors.

"Heís like rain," said a top Israeli official involved in diplomacy with the U.S., speaking of Obamaís role in negotiations.  "You can do all kinds of things to cope with it."

A lot of Americans are learning the same thing, especially Tea Party activists, who threw Obamaís party out of power in the House.  In fact, many of them have a similar opinion of Obama as do the Israelis:

"Israelis really hate Obamaís guts," said Shmuel Rosner, a columnist for two leading Israeli newspapers.  "We used to trust Americans to act like Americans, and this guy is like a European leader."

We feel your pain, dude.
Israel Says Obama Canít Be Trusted
If Egyptís President Hosni Mubarak is toppled, Israel will lose one of its very few friends in a hostile neighborhood and Barack Obama will bear a large share of the blame, Israeli pundits said on Monday.

Political commentators expressed shock at how the United States as well as its major European allies appeared to be ready to dump a staunch strategic ally of three decades, simply to conform to the current ideology of political correctness.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has told ministers of the Jewish state to make no comment on the political cliffhanger in Cairo, to avoid inflaming an already explosive situation, but Israelís President Shimon Peres, who is not a minister said:
    

"We always have had and still have great respect for President Mubarak.  I donít say everything that he did was right, but he did one thing which all of us are thankful to him for: he kept the peace in the Middle East."

    
Newspaper columnists were far more blunt.

One comment by Aviad Pohoryles in the daily Maariv was entitled, "A Bullet in the Back from Uncle Sam."  It accused Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of pursuing a naive, smug, and insular diplomacy heedless of the risks.

Who is advising them, he asked, "to fuel the mob raging in the streets of Egypt and to demand the head of the person who five minutes ago was the bold ally of the president Ö an almost lone voice of sanity in a Middle East?"

"The politically correct diplomacy of American presidents throughout the generations Ö is painfully naive."

"The question is, do we think Obama is reliable or not," said an Israeli official, who declined to be named.

"Right now it doesnít look so.  That is a question resonating across the region not just in Israel."

Writing in Haaretz, Ari Shavit said Obama had betrayed "a moderate Egyptian president who remained loyal to the United States, promoted stability and encouraged moderation."
Making Israel Pay For The "Reset"
Jonathan Tobin says Obamaís paean to democracy in the Arab world was neoconservative in tone and strongly rooted in an American freedom promotion agenda that Obama had derided when running for president as well as in his first years in office.  Obamaís appeal for human rights and proposals for economic development in the region linked to peaceful change from tyranny to freedom was well said and an entirely proper policy pronouncement.  But by linking this appeal to a move that will undermine Israelís negotiating position, Obama has demonstrated that he has little faith that an American freedom agenda is enough to win over the Arab world.

Contrary to reports that said that Obama had decided to pass on enunciating his idea of a framework for Arab-Israeli peace in the wake of the unity pact between Fatah and Hamas, Obama nevertheless proceeded to do just that.  Though Obama paid due deference to Israelís security needs and stated his opposition to Palestinian attempts to delegitimize and isolate Israel, by stating that a framework of peace must be based on the pre-1967 borders, he has dealt the Jewish state a telling diplomatic blow.

Rather than helping to head off a United Nations vote to recognize a Palestinian state without benefit of a peace agreement this fall, Obamaís speech will actually strengthen the Arab argument in favor of such a measure.  Their goal is international recognition of a Palestinian state in every inch of the territories without an agreement that will force either Fatah or Hamas to recognize Israel.  Obamaís endorsement of the 1967 borders -- without any reciprocal measure from a Palestinian Authority that has not only refused to negotiate with Israel but has now allied itself with the Hamas terrorists -- will be seen as implicit support for their refusal to talk until Israel concedes everything in advance.  Though it was couched in neutral terms laden with rhetoric designed to please friends of Israel, the ultimate impact of this speech damages Israelís negotiating position and weakens its ability to stave off efforts designed to further isolate it.

But, as even Obama seemed to acknowledge, the chances that his formula will actually lead to peace are not great.  Why then devote so much attention to this hopeless quest when the real challenge in the region is how Arab societies can transition to freedom from tyranny?

The first reason is that Obama has never wavered from his obsessive belief that Israeli concessions will magically create peace.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, by putting Israel in a corner Obama hopes to score points with the Arab world.  Perhaps rightly, Obama seems to have concluded that American economic aid to the region and our halting and inconsistent support for freedom isnít likely to win many Arab hearts and minds.  But helping to tilt the diplomatic battlefield even further in favor of Israelís Palestinian foes may do the trick.

The problem with this strategy is that even this unprecedented move wonít convince those who hate Israel to love America.  And by damaging Israelís diplomatic position and making its isolation more likely, he has also undermined U.S. interests.

Related:  The Fallacy of the "1967 Borders" -- No Such Borders Ever Existed

Related:  Netanyahu Blasts Obama: Borders "Indefensible, Challenges Our Existence"

Related:  "In his Muslim speech today Barack Obama told Israel to give Old Jerusalem, including the tomb of Jesus, to Hamas."
"A Rank Amateur"
Rick Moran says The One was stewing.  You could almost see the steam coming out of those Dumbo ears of his when Prime Minister Netanyahu turned the tables on Obama and began to lecture HIM.  From ABC News:
    

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seemed to think he needed to educate President Obama on some issues today, so in the Oval Office he described in some detail to the president a history of the refugee problem in the region dating back 63 years, as well as his view on the need for Israel to be able to defend itself in the context of thousands of years of Jewish suffering.

"We don't have a lot of margin for error," Netanyahu said to the president.  "Because, Mr. President, history will not give the Jewish people another chance."

Netanyahu, whose father is a retired academic, offered the president repeated history lessons, saying Jews have "been around for almost 4,000 years.  We have experienced struggle and suffering like no other people.  We've gone through expulsions and pogroms and massacres and the murder of millions.  But I can say that even at the dearth of -- even at the nadir of the valley of death, we never lost hope and we never lost our dream of reestablishing a sovereign state in our ancient homeland, the land of Israel."

[...]

Netanyahu said that "while Israel is prepared to make generous compromises for peace, it cannot go back to the 1967 lines, because these lines are indefensible, because they don't take into account certain changes that have taken place on the ground, demographic changes that have taken place over the last 44 years."

In 1967, Netanyahu said, "Israel was all of 9 miles wide -- half the width of the Washington Beltway... So we can't go back to those indefensible lines, and we're going to have to have a long-term military presence along the Jordan."

    
The topper came when Bibi told Obama, "Hamas has just attacked you, Mr. President, and the United States for ridding the world of bin Laden.  So Israel obviously cannot be asked to negotiate with a government that is backed by the Palestinian version of al-Qaida."

It will be fascinating to watch the dueling speeches at AIPAC -- Obama on Sunday and Netanyahu on Monday -- as well as listening to Bibi's Joint Session of Congress speech on Tuesday.  Expect more war of words from both men as Netanyahu exposes Obama's pandering to the Arabs as the naive maneuverings of a rank amateur.
Obama Ganging Up On Israel
The left-wing Guardian (UK) is reporting that Barack Obama will seek a joint Middle East agreement with David Cameron, insisting that a Palestinian state should be based on pre-1967 borders -- a proposal rejected by Israel's prime minister as "unrealistic" and "indefensible".

The issue will be raised in private talks between the two men during the state visit by Obama and his wife to London.  Afghanistan, Libya, relations with Pakistan and the global economy -- as well as the vacancy for the top job at the IMF -- will also make up the agenda.

Despite the outright rejection by the Israeli premier, Binyamin Netanyahu, of a Palestinian state based on the borders that existed before the Six Day War, when Israel captured and occupied the West Bank and Gaza, Obama has already secured the political backing of the United Nations, European Union and Russia who, with America, are collectively known as the "quartet."

Signaling his determination to keep up pressure on Israel, Obama will be looking to enlist the public support of the UK prime minister.  The aim is, in large part, to persuade the Palestinian leadership not to go to the UN in September seeking symbolic backing for an independent state.

Continue reading here . . .

Related:  Ottawa wonít back Obamaís Mideast peace proposal

After dumping on the British for over two years, Obama now needs their help in his jihad against Israel.
Comments . . .
***  
 

© Copyright  Beckwith  2010 - 2011
All right reserved