Would that the president of the United States were as worried about Arizona’s border as he is about “Palestine’s.”
There was less fanfare about this latest Obama oration on the future of the Middle East, staged at Foggy Bottom, than there was about his 2009 Cairo speech. It was, however, every bit as delusional, and twice as treacherous.
As for the delusional, “Arab Spring” devotees are thrilled that the president has morphed into his predecessor on the Democracy Project — the enterprise in which future generations of American taxpayers go deeper into hock as our tapped-out government borrows more Chinese billions in order to stimulate the Muslim Brotherhood, one of the few shovel-ready projects President Obama has managed to find (and as a union, the Brothers make the SEIU look like the Jaycees). There is cruel irony in the Arab Spring hallucination, though, evidenced by this bit of rhetorical flourish: “Through the moral force of nonviolence, the people of the region have achieved more change in six months than terrorists have accomplished in six years.”
Advertisement
As the president utters his paeans to nonviolence, Egyptians and Iraqis continue slaughtering their religious minorities, and Bashar Assad, the “reformer,” murders his Syrian subjects in the street with the help of his friends at Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed terrorist organization whose day job is running the Lebanese government. The democracy fetish that gave Hezbollah and Hamas thugs the patina of political legitimacy is about to place Egypt under the thumb of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is itching to deep-six the treaty that has kept peace with Israel for 30 years. Speaking of Israel, it is recovering from a weekend in which thousands of “peaceful protesters” stormed four of its borders. Meanwhile, Iraq, which is touted by Arab Spring enthusiasts — and now even the Obama Left — as a Democracy Project success story, just announced that it will show its gratitude to American soldiers and taxpayers by expanding military ties with Iran, the world’s leading facilitator of Islamist terror. Pakistan, when not holding memorial services for Osama bin Laden, is exploding in bloodshed. The Obama administration is pleading with the Taliban to come to the negotiating table; you may recall that the Taliban is the reason our troops are still in Afghanistan preventing the collapse of its fragile “democracy” and the reopening of a safe haven for al-Qaeda. And al-Qaeda’s current safe haven, Yemen, is the site of a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. So much for nonviolence.
The president stumbled into a bracing truth when he compared the change achieved by the people in the region, on the one hand, and by terrorists on the other. The change both are seeking is the same: the creation of sharia societies. Obama and Democracy Project promoters like to frame the Arab Spring as the ultimate rejection of al-Qaeda. But it is, at most, a discovery that there are better tactical routes to the promised land than al-Qaeda’s crude brutality. That promised land is not Western liberalism; it is Islam in all its repression of free speech, religious liberty, and equality — American principles the president spoke of his boundless determination to promote, while avoiding a single mention of Islam or sharia, which make achieving those principles a pipedream in this region.
Speaking of the promised land, the real one, Israel, is apparently getting smaller. This was Obama’s news-making treachery, and its ramifications are impossible to predict, other than that they bode ill.
For the first time in history, an American president explicitly called for a settlement of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict premised on the 1967 borders — i.e., the 1949 armistice line, the tenuous state of play before Israel captured the West Bank (actually, Judea and Samaria), the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights in the Arab war of aggression to destroy the Jewish state. To be sure, Obama said that there would also have to be territorial “swaps” to satisfy security concerns. This caveat, though, is cold comfort for Israel, America’s only true ally in the region.
To begin with, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quick to point out, the 1967 borders are “indefensible.” That is why they have never been the starting point of U.S. policy, even though they always hover over negotiations. In its implacable hostility to Israel, the “international community” chooses to forget how and why the Arab side first grabbed, then lost, the territory in question. For nearly a half century since the adoption of U.N. Security Council resolution 242, the Washington Institute’s Robert Satloff explains, American administrations of both parties have called for eventual Israeli withdrawal to “secure and recognized” borders, a phrase interpreted as “not synonymous with the pre-1967 boundaries.”
By his new articulation, President Obama would deny Israel crucial negotiating leverage. If there is to be a peace settlement (which there cannot be until there are two parties that want peace), Israel must have the latitude to make territorial concessions in exchange for reliable concessions on security and other matters. It cannot be coerced into accepting an Obama-imposed fait accompli that leaves it fatally vulnerable to enemies whose ferocity is only encouraged by this bullying.
Bear in mind that what are called the “1967 borders” were never agreed-upon national boundaries. The Jewish claim on Judea and Samaria has roots in antiquity. This fact was intentionally obfuscated by Obama’s earlier suggestion in Cairo that Israel’s creation was an ill-conceived payback for the Holocaust, as it is by the convention of referring to Judea and Samaria as “the West Bank,” the name Jordan gave them when it seized and occupied them at the conclusion of Israel’s war of independence. The Arabs, of course, never created a Palestinian state when it was within their power to do so. Thus, the final disposition of this territory has never been resolved. It is a subject for negotiations, not predetermined Palestinian sovereignty.
Andy, it's all quite predictable you see, because......
He is the very model of a modern major President,
Who scorns America and Jews 'cause he's a global resident,
Ne'er to be questioned by all his mainstream media sycophants,
He'll bring the refugees home even if he must use elephants......
He's very well acquainted, too, with matters antithetical
to Israel, those Jews he knows are greedy, hypocritical,
Because they make their neighbor's countries miserably unlivable,
It's all the fault of Israel, it's no longer theoretical......
The ancient hates, to heal, we know that he is truly capable,
He'll give the Arab's borders back, they're so easily traceable,
He'll sign Hamas's treaty, they are totally reliable,
Their brothers in the Brotherhood are secular, it's quite believable!
You see it's really fundamental, truly elementary,
The path to peace needs only his rhetorical commentary,
Nothing to do with Palestine, their looniness secondary,
It needs the glory of his modern major presidentiary.
JoeWI,
You ought to win a medal or be even made a knight. (Know what that's from?)
I also liked a comment I saw elsewhere asking if Obama is getting America ready to cede the land we took from Mexico back to that country. That is an especially good question now that that area of Mexico has become a staging ground for murder and mayhem on our border.
I certainly wouldn't put anything past this president who seems to like doing things that are harmful to this country.
I too was thinking that Obama either does not know how or refuses to secure our own borders while giving Bebe advice on how to secure his...this Obama is an very incompetent man - and dangerous because he seems to dislike America so much that he is undermining her every chance he gets. Can you imagine what he will do if he gets another 4 years in office...with nothing to lose? Beware Americans...you've just begun to see how dangerous this man's policies are!!!
Has this past week been an episode of the Twilight Zone?! Seems so, when a United States president tries to subject our most loyal ally to a Mideast policy that would result in Israel's utter destruction.
Mr. Obama is in a time-warp of self-imposed, purposeful ignorance of the past 100 years of history in the Mid-East. Rod Serling would be proud of the BO administration's fantasy machinations--great material for the his left flank and the radicals all across the Mid-East.
I could certainly recommend a whole list of great books on the topic of how the modern State of Israel came to be, but then BO would need to face reality and admit that the "Arab Spring" (where in the world did that ridiculous phrase come from, anyway?!) is just a figment of his fantasy world.
Countless U.S. administrations have yearned to be the one to finally resolve the Israeli/Palestinian conundrum, mostly for its own political benefit. This administration is no different, other than trying to sacrifice Israel's security and very existence for the sake of getting the 'bad boys' to play nice and like the U.S. for giving them what they live for--literally the end of ISRAEL!!
It is a shocking and hideous policy that this administration is trying so desperately to establish as the norm, the starting point for BO's next big bragging jag.
What such a policy would do is set the entire Mid-East aflame, not just a skirmish here and there as we see now, but all-out WAR in which America would certain be drawn into.
Now that's something BO could really brag about while be blames everyone else for not doing what he wants!
Hopefully the Obama Twilight Zone episode will end in about 18 months--none too soon.
“Through the moral force of nonviolence, the people of the region have achieved more change in six months than terrorists have accomplished in six years.”
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Comedian-In-Chief; he'll be here all week. Try the veal!
If it's true that 'The Jewish claim on Judea and Samaria has roots in antiquity.', then why doesn't that apply to territories one habitated by Mexicans, American Indians, et al ? That line of argument disturbs me.
Why not just say 'we took it, we have it, and we're going to keep it.' ?
"Any final status agreement must be reached between the two parties, and changes to the 1949 Armistice Lines must be mutually agreed to. A viable two-state solution must ensure contiguity on the West Bank, and a state of scattered territories will not work. There must also be meaningful linkages between the West Bank and Gaza. This is the position of the United States today; it will be the position of the United States at the time of final status negotiations." - George W. Bush, 2005
Obama's treachery not only puts our friends in danger, he puts Americans all over the world in danger, by accepting the fact that terrorism works. Hence the reason why it is so important to ascertain the qualifications and loyalties of the candidates for president. The signs predicting this were all there prior to the election. Many chose not see them.
Cartoons are kind of bland this morning, so I can't wait for real life inanity provided by the lib commentators here to rally from their Friday night absinthe hangovers and mock Andrew for being so harsh as to call out BHO for what he is.
Foremost, the Palestinians have been treated as a lower class by their Arab brethen. Yes, they're used as pawns, blah/blah. However, when one is subjected to the situation they are in, both by their fellow Arabs and even by the Israelis who continue to expand settlements, then why wouldn't anyone understand that they have nothing to lose by continuing to rely on terrorism. Are you that naive? In reality, have you ever thought that perhaps what Obama is saying allows the Israelis to use it to their favor. Foremost in the upcoming UN meetings and then afterwards even if the Muslim Brotherhood takes control of Egypt, do you really think that they are going to attempt to invade Israel. In fact, Israel will finally be able to blow not only the Palestinians away, but also the Syrians, the Iranians and other radicals away leaving Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Iraqis to divy up the remants of the middle east. I say give Israel the ammo to blow the radicals away. You think what is happening now is working?
Do the NRO's columnists and readers not perceive the implicit injustice in denying return to a native-born Palestinian while at the same time recognizing a right of return for a Jew from, say, the US who has never even set foot there? Might a reasonable person not consider it unjust that this same person could also settle into what is still considered occupied territory?
Realistically, a blanket right of return for Palestinians is untenable and will never happen. However, a small, symbolic gesture allowing some of the oldest among the displaced to return would go a long way.
Mr. McCarthy, I would have like more verbiage addressing the similarities with what the President is doing with our southern borders. Certainly there are Hispanic activists saying the US stole the land of the southwest, even as there are activists insisting Israel stole the West Bank area.
It is easy to conflate theft and conquest, I guess, though the first implies individual effort and the second national effort. It is not practical to undo all the results of conquests that have happened throughout history. "Giving back" a conquest implies it was a simple theft, when actually a nation usually pays in the blood of its citizens for its conquests, even though other nations may say the invaders have no right to invade. The taking of land or assets seems rarely to be a case of shoplifting.
Should the entire world return to borders it had in 10,000 BC? If so, why? If not that year, then what year is to serve as the baseline year, and why? Is Israel the only nation to be affected by this, or should the US also have to pull back? Will Mexicans have to move to Spain unless they can prove Incan or Mayan ancestry? Will they even be asked to move to the allegedly Mexican parts of the US, or will the illegals stay put wherever they are?
If you start "giving back", not only do the logistics become even more convoluted than the rationale, but eventually the takers start demanding land they might have settled if you hadn't been in the way. The outcome of conquests should be undone only by other conquests, as when the US fought the Iraqis out of Kuwait in the first Iraq War. If the Islamic nations don't like losing land to Israel, they should quit attacking.
Andrew McCarthy seems to believe he is a supporter of Israel. However, mindless propaganda like this article will be used to justify continued Israeli expansion and aggression. Which is exceedingly harmful to the peaceful existence of Israel in the long run.
State Senator Barak Obama was a progressive, left wing sociallist who spent most of his adult life under the mentorship of a jew-hating Pastor. Why think 180 or so days as a US Senator and a presidential campaign would make him any different as a president?
Is it beyond the pale that POTUS would consider using his "war powers" to compel our military to defend Palestine against their enemy Israel? I seem to recall the abject threat to shoot down Israeli aircraft headed for Iran with the nefarious mission of disrupting the peaceful production of beneficent nuclear energy. After all, if the Libyan rebels deserve our assistance against their oppressor why not the equally oppressed Palestinians? Just asking...
Bravo Mr.McCarthy for your clear presentation of facts versus fiction. Maybe one day history will be taught again - until then your lessons on the Constitution, the law and lately, foreign policy, fill the yawning gap very ably. Thank you.
Bravos too for witty JoeWI - Mr.Gilbert must be smiling on you today. Fitting that the Pirates of Penzance is the only G & S opera to have its official premiere in the US. Let's see now, who should we nominate to walk the plank first?
If Obama were serious about the Middle East (not just Israel), he would address all of the following.
Full and unconditional diplomatic recognition of Israel
Full and unconditional recognition of Israel’s right to exist within secure borders
Full cessation of all acts of war against Israel, including but not limited to: full cessation of all economic boycotts and embargoes against Israel; full cessation of military action against Israel by independent states (Syria, Iran) AND their proxies: Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Al-Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade, ET. AL. (that is, EVERY single proxy)
Netanyahu and Israel are right to say to Obama: NO DEALS until the above basic requirements are met.
Obama has a surprise coming. The internet, that which helped catapult him to the presidency and was his biggest asset, is now becoming his biggest liability. America now knows the truth about this arrogant, egocentric empty suit, thanks to the power of the unfiltered internet. The MSM can no longer save him. On November 6, 2012 he will be ousted. Then, on Janaury 20, 2013, he will be evicted. The only uncertainty that remains is whether or not he will be prosecuted and then convicted after leaving office.
A commendable article, but the essence of conflict has nothing at all to do with land or borders. It is a conflict of barbarism against civilization. No matter how much land Israel gives up, it will never be enough - and the "Palestinians" SAY so publicly. We are not listening. Here is a story that illustrates precisely: External Link
Look at a map of the Middle East. Other countries have vast unused swatches of land, while tiny little Israel has little to none. Let the other Middle Eastern countries (who purport to be deeply concerned over the issue) give up some of their lands as part of the two state solution.
