Israel Is Up Against the Wall -

The President’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, has made it abundantly clear this week that efforts to stop Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons depended heavily on Israel pursuing peace talks with the Palestinians. Apparently, this was said during a closed door meeting at the AIPAC convention on Sunday (Its unclear if any dead fish were in the room when Rahmbo made this statement).
The White House scrambled to kill this story and for the second time in a week, Press Secretary Gibbs had to elaborate on the meaning behind the words uttered by the Administration officials (first was when Veep Biden warned that people should avoid all means of public transportation – to which Gibbs explained that he meant anyone feeling sick should avoid public transportation.). Gibbs explained that Emanuel meant that one didn’t hinge upon the other; rather, both goals can be achieved simultaneously. Truthfully, stopping Iran would be easier if a larger coalition was brought together; a coalition that consisted of Arab and Western nations alike. However, peace with Palestinians should not be the motivational factor for these countries. There are so many others - survival, for instance. After all, every Arab country in the region along with Israel and the US would be threatened by a nuclear Iran. However, despite attempts to make Emanuel’s words more moderate, there seems to be an undeniable much harsher tone in the Obama Administration, which in fact has pinned Israel between a rock and a hard place.
Secretary of State Hilary Clinton ( as you might recall, when she was First Lady representing our country in the Middle East, she gave Arafat’s wife a loving embrace) said, “ For Israel to get the kind of strong support (I assume she means US support) it is looking for, vis-à-vis Iran, it can’t stay on the sidelines with respect to the Palestinians and the peace efforts. They go hand in hand.”
When has Israel ever stood on the sideline, Mrs. Clinton? Time and time again, Israel makes concessions in hope of peace, and time and time again the Palestinians have rejected the proposals. They wanted more land, Israel gave them more land. They wanted the Jews out of their newly acquired territories, Israel moved its citizens, whole towns, from their homes and neighborhoods, in some cases by force. Israel has not been on the sidelines. Israel has been in the thick of it from the beginning, and from the beginning the Palestinians keep taking, and walking, taking and walking.
Palestinians have their own territories, but no real government. It remains a terrorist state. They have done very little to move their people towards a more stable and economically free existence. With so many uncertainties, who exactly are the Israelis suppose to talk to? If the Palestinians can’t control their own turf, if they can’t guarantee safety, if they cannot acknowledge the right of Israel to exist, how can a peace process begin? While America tries to figure that out, Iran is arming.
When it comes to Iran, Israel needs America’s strong support. America can offer Israel support in the international community. They can help with military logistics. Israel and its leaders know that they cannot make an aggressive move to stop Iran without the nod to go ahead from the US. Without that nod, without that support, Israel would be in a very difficult position. They would be standing alone for the first time in a very long time.
President Bush understood the importance of a strong friendship between Israel and America. In 2008 he said, “Israel's population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you." And, Bush understood the threat of Iran. During the same trip he said, “Permitting the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest weapons would be an unforgivable betrayal for future generations," the president said. "For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon."
Let quote that again, “For the sake of peace the world must not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons”
The tone of this administration is vastly different. It would appear that the Obama administration is drastically changing its foreign policy in regard to Israel and the peace process. In fact, their new policy seems to be simple: If you want our support when it comes to stopping Iran, begin cutting deals with the Palestinians. It is blackmail, or an ultimatum at the very least. Now is that how friends behave?
Israel is facing a very existential threat. Iran threatens the very existence of Israel every chance it gets. They want to annihilate Israel; to kill every man, woman and child. In fact, they believe it is their divine purpose! Israel and America, in fact the world, must keep a close eye on Iran. Stopping Iran’s nuclear program, either by force or diplomacy (sure, if your delusional, give it a shot), is critical. A nuclear Iran would throw the region into utter chaos; a vicious war would erupt as Iran tries to capture control of the entire region. Generations to follow will suffer if Iran has the ability to threaten the global community with a nuclear arsenal. But, I don’t think Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons to use them as leverage on the world stage. They aren’t here to bargain. No, no, no. Iran will use them, and their first target will be Israel.
While, America seems to be pressuring Israel to focus on a peace process before committing support in regard to Iran, what is Iran up to?
Well, hate doesn’t die easily and a madman doesn’t become sane overnight. While visiting Syria, one of Israel’s most critical allies, on Tuesday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad described Zionism (he is referring to Israelis, not an ideology, by the way) as "occupation" and "aggression". And he continued, “The Zionist occupiers are destructive microbes, because Zionism itself is occupation, aggression, the use of assassination and annihilation.” Wait, there is more, "Zionism was created to threaten us. To support the Palestinian resistance is a humanitarian and popular obligation. Syria and Iran are united in supporting the Palestinian resistance."

Palestinian resistance? Doesn’t sound like much of a peace process to me? If only America was as committed to Israel’s future as Iran seems to be to the Palestinians.


For the last eight years, Israel had a strong ally and friend with then President Bush. When confronted with the Israel/Iran question, President Bush said during his last trip there, “If I were an Israeli, I would take the words of the Iranian president seriously, and as president of the United States I take them seriously,"

“If Iran were to strike Israel, Bush said, "We will defend our ally, no ands, ifs or buts."
That was the way President Bush felt. What about Obama?
Time will tell, but, it seems that President Obama and his administration views the Iran threat as an opportunity to force Israel into a peace process. To quote Emanuel’s famous line “Never let a crisis go to waste”. What exactly do they hope to gain from the Iranian crisis as it escalates? Perhaps, a weak Israel and strong Palestine ( on the campaign trail Obama called the Palestinians the most persecuted nation on earth which would mean that Israel are most persecuting nation on earth)? Or maybe they seek an incoherent, nonviable, unsustainable peace?
Either way, Israel is being pushed into a very uncomfortable position. How effectively can Israel negotiate under these conditions? Imagine a person who has fallen off a subway platform and landed on the tracks. His shoes are untied and there is only one person standing at the platform who can help pull him out. The train is rumbling down the track and is seconds away from where he stands. He desperately extends his hand up and asks the man to help him out. “Tie your shoes first, and then I will pull you out,” says the man. With his very life on the line, how easily do you think this guy is going to be able to tie his shoes?