The Only Two Endings to Arab Israeli War

 

One of them was considered inevitable and even about to become historic fact. When the United Nations Made their respective division of lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea there were constant ongoing debates in the make-up of the map and who got what lands with some holding that it mattered not one bit which was chosen as the Arab Armies from all of the neighboring Arab States and beyond would descend upon the Jews slaughtering every last Jew. Finally, on November 29, 1947 the United Nations issued their non-binding General Assembly Resolution 181, also known as the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. The Jews under the authority of the Zionist Congress and the majority of Jewish groups accepted the plan without reservations and emphasized that the Jewish People were now granted a great opportunity to build a modern Jewish State which would live in peace with its neighbors. The Arab States reacted bristling with threats of annihilations sweeping the Middle East of the Jews and forcing them into the sea. These have been the persistent visions though how it had been fought has changed. The Arab rejection of the partition plan invalidated only the plans for dividing the lands but left the founding of some form of statehood over the last remaining piece of the British Mandate set for the ensuing May 15th of 1948. This meant that on that date the remaining claimant received all of the land of the remaining mandate as their land. This claim was further backed by the agreement between Arab League and Zionist Congress dividing British Mandate along the Jordan River such that the greater portion of just over three-fourths were to be Arab Land and the just under one-fourth reserved as indivisible protected by the British Crown for a Jewish State, (see maps below). This was how the situation sat on midnight of the morning of May 15th of 1948. The attitudes had not changed, simply became more encompassing on the Arab side with proclamations by the various leaders both secular and especially religious shrilling repeating the obvious destruction of any Jewish State, though their actual wordings were more shrill and far more descriptive using terminology such as slaughter, “Sweeping the Jews into the Sea,” annihilation such as Genghis Kahn and promises that no Jewish State would be permitted to reside in the heart of Arab Muslim lands Allah Will Providing. One can see, the sides and their rhetoric have little changed, Israel still calling for peace and mutual advancement and the Arabs for the total destruction of the Jewish State only now funneling such goals as support for the Palestinians to have their state on their lands which just happen to include all of Israel.

 

Left UN Partition Plan Resolution 181 Rejected by Arabs
Making Original British Partition Arab and Jewish Lands
as Only Standing Agreement Supported in 1921 Arab League
and Zionist Congress Backed by British Crown as Valid

 

 

The evening of May 14, 1948 came and under the Jewish calendar the next day starts at sundown. The Israelis began their celebrations throughout the lands with great joy and exuberance showing no trepidations or sense of preparedness for the certain cataclysmic conflagrations which would commence the next morning and continue with some short, but important for both sides, armistice finally being ended at the final armistice line today referred to as the Green Line. This conflict had the most illogical of conclusions as both sides took opposite views, both with each other and each with what were the considered historical definitions of win and lose. The Arabs saw the concluding armistices as actions that would prove to be but a temporary cessation of the conflict which soon would not matter not as their victory would be made absolute soon, Allah permitting.

As the Arabs had seen gaining control over land not under their control at the onset of the war as a loss, the Jews saw their loss over those lands as their resultant victory as they had avoided the cataclysmic destruction of their entire state and their lives and the lives of every last Jew for whose protection they fought. Their victory was living to see another day and to retain the thought and existence of a Jewish State founded approximately two-thousand years after the Roman Dispersion and over two-thousand years after the last Maccabean Jewish State ruled. Since this cessation of fire this became the “Golden Borders” which Western negotiators always treated as the sacrosanct borders of choice. Every negotiation deliberated with claims that the Jordan River as the border never existed even for one day as the border of the Jewish State, a thought proven only by admitting a complete lack of both historical and biblical writings as one validates the other. The original Biblical Promised Lands by the application promised by Moses as described by the promises to Abraham and also Isaack and Jacob made by Hashem was defined by the Jordan River for those east of the River were defined as those the Israelites were not to war against but those west of the Jordan River had become so evil that their eradication from history was warranted. What was it that made them so evil can be traced back to the sacrifice Hashem demanded of Abraham only to intervene and demand that not only was his sacrificed beyond undesired but strictly forbidden by Hashem to make such sacrifice in any manner or way. This was the Sacrifice of Isaack, thus the Canaanites were an abomination as in their worship of Baal they sacrificed their children to their stone idol. Upon arriving at the Jordan River and the two tribes of herders, Reuben and Gad, requested of Moses to remain east as the lands were good for their cattle to graze and their ensuing promise to lead every battle for the conquest and remain until every other tribe had received their lands. This is from Numbers 32 which showed that even to remain east of the Jordan where their cattle could graze the two tribes of Reuben and Gad were required to take the lead in every battle thus risking the greatest numbers in casualties but often also the standout accomplishments. This was to absolve them of the lack of faith that their cattle would have eaten well in the Promised Lands west of the Jordan River.

 

Despite the Biblical evidence there is the agreement in the Churchill White Paper of June 3, 1922, calling to form the entity of Transjordan, with the border being the Jordan River and everything eastward leaving the remainders west of the Jordan River for the formation of the Jewish State. The Jordan River, for obvious reasons, has historically been the border used from the Biblical eras through until the Armistice of 1949 when the Jewish State controlled their smallest amount of lands. This was the only time at the end of hostilities that Israel was so restricted in land. As a consequence this border was the worst starting point Israel ever faced at the onset of war in 1967 which was the start of the Six Day War. At every ensuing war since the Six Day War the Jordan River had been the eastern boundary and at times beyond the Jordan River. Still the entirety of world efforts are to force Israel into her most vulnerable of positions she had ever held though the time of those boundaries has been less with the Jordan River and Golan Heights (which Israel annexed) have served as the border of Israel. The Golan Heights required annexation to become part of Israel and this was 1981 which was received with excessive series of condemnations and accusations of illegally expanding the recognized borders of Israel and you name it even to include references to this being the first step towards the attempt by Israel to achieve their desired Greater Israel. Nowhere did anyone refer to the portion of the Security Council Resolution 242 which allowed Israel to retain portions of the lands taken in a defensive war, which by historical precedents allowed for the winning side if having the war brought upon them managed to not only survive by push their aggressors back to retain all lands gained, Israel has subsequently returned the majority of the lands she held at the end of the Six Day War and the Yom Kippur War, both defensive wars, when Israel returned the entirety of the Sinai Peninsula. Should Israel retain the areas won from Jordan, were actually more liberated than conquered, as these were lands within the border declared and denoted by the United Nations on November 29, 1947, a critically conspicuous date either in its being mentioned or ignored.

 

The world apparently will neither remember their vote from 1947 nor the promises by the British in 1922 as both grants the Jordan River and all lands west as reserved for the formation of the Jewish State. Their insistence on, as President Bush and President Obama clearly stated the borders must be made with agreed swaps on the 1967 lines, 1949 Armistice Lines; both represent what has the denotations of the Green Line, which in Israeli interpretations are anything but green. The sad thing is it matters not what the world decides, states, implies or forces upon Israel. Nor does it matter one iota what Israel annexes, does not annex but holds, returns, becomes burdened with as return refused by former occupier as in Gaza and Egypt, or any other combination whereof. Nothing done here today on the Earth will change the inevitable and decisive, absolute, definitive and inevitable ending battle which will begin the resolution of this continuing conflict once and for all. One manner is so simple we can explain it in two sentences or conceivably less, so here goes. Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) lines are broken at numerous points and there is a race to completely crash the IDF defenses routing any hope at stopping the Arab victory. The result of this should be obvious to all.

 

There is a difference in the meaning of victory for the two sides. A victory for Israel is that they did not lose and everyone being killed. If the IDF broke the enemies’ lines and made significant gains and gained crucial geographically critical areas such as the Golan Heights and Jordan River and Velley, this is significant if such gains can be used to reach a land for peace which turns out to be a true peace paper for all time and not just a piece of paper applied for a limited time. The return of the Sinai Peninsula was a compromise insisted upon by Egypt as Israel was willing to return Gaza but Egypt refused the additional lands demanding that Israel retain the Gaza. This resulted in the peace treaty with Egypt which was observed under Sadat who bravely made peace and paid for it with his life as the Muslim Brotherhood arranged his assassination. President Mubarak was his successor and also observed the treaty and his plight for such acts against the people have played out in the recent past as he too was killed for his keeping the peace with the Jewish State. Morsi did not keep the treaty but made a human error and ignored the people and threatened the military, bad combination with almost unavoidable end which Morsi did not escape. Now Egypt is ruled by its former ranking General who won their second free and open elections. His name is el-Sisi and he had taken steps and made decisions which would endear him to the people which made him the expectant winner of any election, and he had some respected and respectable opposition. The peace with Egypt remains intact even if shakily so. But is it a real peace if it depends on who rules Egypt and each new ruler of Egypt gets to decide if they need obey that peace or not if it becomes inconvenient or inhibits their desire to write large in history that unlike all the others who also hated the Zionist entity, they destroyed it. And that takes us to the other side once we realize Israel offers peace to all her enemies, an honest peace which ends any hostilities, and it is there for them to grasp if they honestly, and unfortunately as a ploy to gain advantage. So, Israel may welcome a true peace and is willing to accept even the shakiest of offers or sacrifices necessitated, but what will end the conflict?

 

As has been established, an Arab victory is easily discerned by simply reading their news, propaganda, school textbooks in Gaza and Judea and Samaria (West Bank), music, social media, historical records, Imam Sermons, political speeches and virtually wherever one looks or listens or reads; their definition over Israel does not end in a surrender followed by a simple change on governance, it results in a military victory followed by violence and slaughter on a Biblical scale with the death of over six-million Israeli Jews and unknown deaths among Israeli Christians, Druze, Bedouins and Muslims as outside of all Arab Muslim towns anybody and everybody is a potential target for the bloodletting which would follow. Not only would the conquering soldiers take part in this violence, the general populace would be permitted to take part in the slaughter in order to bring honor to their families such that even young children will be assisted in killing their share so that they could have a link to this glorious slaughter. To the Western World and the Wester mind such acts are inconceivable and their reaction when told of such realities is one of skepticism and denial, but there is too much evidence for outright dismissal. The most famous representation of this was a picture shot by a photojournalist and gotten out before any interception was possible, otherwise this photo below would never have seen the light of day. The picture thus eluded the censors who heavily restrict any news and especially any photos or videos as each is more threatening a media likely to reveal things those in power cannot allow to be reported such as the celebratory exultations, street parades and all sorts of spontaneous celebratory exuberance on the verge of insanity and pure blood lust unknown in much of the world but not all places. This would be the unavoidable and unstoppable even if their political or religious leaders actually cared to end it due to the excessive hatreds being stoked for decades would override all else and the slaughter would proceed as if on an hyper-autopilot.

 

 

Teenaged Terrorists Displays Bloodied Hands Sending Crowd
Gathered to Witness or Take Part in Sacrificing IDF Reservists
Tearing Them Apart with Their Bare Hands

 

 

That leaves what an Israel victory would look like. First, we are not talking what a peace from the Israeli side would look like as that is already known by their willingness to accept the armistice ending the war of annihilation which started the morning Israel declared her independence despite having lost over twenty percent of her total area she had the morning of the founding and ten percent of her population yet an end to the violence was so welcomed they declared this as their war of Independence. About the only resemblance to other wars of independence was the existence of Israel at the end of the war. Where other nations make their declaration of statehood from an occupying power or at the end of a war overthrowing previous governance, Israel was brought into existence at an expressed time by legal writ of the overseeing world body and had the neighboring nations not invaded come the morning sun there would have been no such war and the celebrations might have lasted much longer.

 

In the ensuing wars of 1956 British, French, Israeli alliance war with Egypt when Egypt closed the Suez Canal and the Straight of Tiran to shipping thus instigating a casus belli resulting in an Israel capture of the Sinai Peninsula so quickly the Egyptian call to the British and French approaching naval and air power requesting a stay of attack and to now hold talks. The French and British backed by the United States and United Nations agreed that Egypt would open the blockaded seaways in exchange for the return of the Sinai Peninsula, Israel agreed. After the 1967 Six Day War there were another set of armistice lines set by the United Nations and acquiesced but not formally recognized by the Arab states and accepted by Israel. There were the Golan Heights, the Suez Canal and the Jordan River. In the 1973 Yom Kippur war Egypt and Syria successfully opened a surprise attack on Israel while mainline forces had been granted large numbers of leaves for the High Holidays. Israel was knocked reeling but was able to put together responses using mixed regular line units made from whatever troops were gathered in different parts of the country with whatever equipment was available and sully dispatch reserve units and by the war’s end were routing Syrian units and well on their way to Damascus, routed Egyptian units and were heading for Cairo and Alexandria when Israel was informed that if they returned to the armistice lines which were in effect after the Six Day War the Arabs would agree to end hostilities, Israel agreed.

 

Israel made peace with Egypt and offered to return the entirety of the Sinai and Gaza, Egypt drew the line leaving Israel Gaza as Egypt found the area too unruly to control and wished the ticking time-bomb be part of Israel. Israel made peace with Jordan and offered to return their occupied areas they called the West Bank, Jordan refused the return of the land. It was some time until Jordan decided to pass their “claims” to the West Bank to the PLO such that the Palestinians could now claim those lands as having been stolen by Israel in an unnecessary and unprovoked war which was not started by the “Palestinian People of Palestine” which was the first we heard that Palestine was the West Bank. Before this the occupation was all of Israel. Despite the treachery and complete falsehoods used to make any claim to the lands Israel holds, the reality is every opportunity for a real or even appearance of real peace offered Israel has accepted the offer in the hope it would be honored by the next ruler in nations notorious for breaking terms made by previous rulers. Israel, under the Prime Ministerships of Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert offered well over ninety-five-percent (that is over 95%) of the West Bank, all of Gaza and half of Jerusalem to end the standoff and both men, with one offering more than the predecessor, were refused without even the dignity of a counter offer. For Israel peace means equality for her citizens, security for all within her borders all the time, no wars, no terrorism, no questioning by those within her borders of whether they will be safe taking in a show, going to a restaurant for dinner or even having pizza for lunch on a summer’s day sightseeing with the kids. Peace means Israel need not worry about wars brought by her neighboring nations, their neighbors or even their neighbors which would include Iran as that is the distance Iran is from Israel, so Iranian claims of border incursions made by Israel are so much lies and propagandas. This includes the charges of Israeli spies brought against, as far as we have been able to discern, Mossad trained squirrels, pigeons and other various animals and the one-off spiritual summoned entity. Israel poses Iran absolutely no threat while the opposite cannot be said.

 

That is what peace with Israel looks like, peace without threats, propaganda and even cooperation where such can be arranged and performed preferably above board, but below and out of sight in required, though in the open for assistance is preferred as such shows a true and lasting peace exists. Such a peace will take years of deprogramming the Arab street and will take a change of heart in one of the main underlying influences which overrules national leaders and is feared by any wise leader hoping to instigate such a change as these are dangerous tides in which to swim. Any such person attempting such an overreaching and complete change in the substrate of an entirety that rules the minds of over one billion of mankind is playing with forces beyond imagination and would require the backing of a force capable of monitoring and resisting such a deeply seated force that people willing will launch themselves to certain death in order to satisfy the dictate given them from an authority figure. Such is an area fraught with dangers and requires equal parts bravado, carefully placements of steps, rigid backbone to their support and deadly accurate intelligence as the opponent will use deadly force as if it were salt sprinkled on a meal. There was once such a man in Turkey and his fine work was destroyed from the strangest of places, the White House and Brussels, Belgium, but that is a take for another day.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Obsessed Appeasement Expropriators Descend

 

The circus which accompanies the establishing of a new Israeli government finally formed after any elections cycle, planned or unexpected, comes this time in force beyond imagination. Usually there is coordination resulting in a single team arriving all carrying briefcases brimming with demands for new sacrifices Israel will be expected to make simply to allow these experts to meet with Mahmoud Abbas and his minions and receive another list of demands that Israel submit in order to attain a humbled attitude considered suitable for a meeting an Arab Palestinian delegations whose diplomacy is more insults and degradations than hospitable intercourse which usually accompanies normative mediations. This time the demands will be presented in surround sound as teams from the United States, the anticipatory fomenters, the United Nations, the European Union who come salivating for Israel’s destruction, and an outside agitator granting audience and treaties recognizing Mahmoud Abbas as the maker and seeker of peace granting him every comfort and recognition of his nightmarish nation without setting borders permitting Abbas to define as he desires. All these messengers bleat tired and tortured phrases which have been repeated for over twenty years to a point where they no longer have any real meaning. The most basic of these entreaties is the demand that Israel make some great offer which might ingratiate Israelis in the eyes of the leaders of the Arab Palestinians who already have proven their desire for peace as they have repeatedly asked for any and all these parties to intervene and plead their case in order that they might finally be granted the peace they so desperately desire. The problem is nobody has ever bothered to research and inquire of the Arab Palestinians exactly what their concept of an acceptable peace would require and what the Israelis might be required to sacrifice and perform in order for this peace to finally be attainable. Perhaps that might someday be the first step for these angels for peace who will be descending upon Israel to once again bless Israeli sacrifices even to the point of suicidal dispensations as a first step towards appeasement of the Arab unarticulated demands for peace.

 

As Israel has already offered the Arabs as much as 95% of Judea and Samaria, detached from their Jewish history by Jordan renaming the area to West Bank, all of Gaza, which is already in Arab hands since the disengagement in 2005, and all of East Jerusalem back in 2000 and again in 2002, both times with exchange of properties and lands to equate the final 5% of land and both times the Arab leadership simply walked out of the negotiations without even making a counter offer, demands for adjustment or any commentary, just refusing in the most impolite and insulting manner possible, silent dismissal as if such an offer were an insult. Perhaps the United States, United Nations, and European Union could, as long as the whole representation of the Western World and beyond are represented, take a different initial step and instead of starting with Israel take a stroll to Ramallah and simply inquire as to exactly what the Arab Palestinian leaders would demand of Israel in order to establish a fair and mutually acceptable and equally beneficial entertaining equal sacrifices and accommodations and once the great leaders who claim they are only in the Middle East to facilitate peace can finally establish the desired demands for a final settlement from Abbas and company and then perhaps there can be some fair and egalitarian resolution with both sides finally reaching a meeting of their minds. Somehow we here at Beyond the Cusp suspect that such a meeting would be revealing as the Arab leadership would either refuse to speak in specifics and decline to even approach a map, let alone speak of borders or perhaps they might surprise the world and actually state their actual demand, all of Israel with the Jews removed by any means necessary including another holocaust. Should the delegations from the United Nations, European Union and United States actually manage to gain a potentially acceptable offer from Mahmoud Abbas and the rest of the leadership which might be in any way presentable to the Israelis, then finally the crux of the real problem might finally be brought into the light. The reason that all the demands are always placed on Israel and never on the Arabs is because of a basic truth, the Israelis have proven their desire for peace while the Arabs have only proven their desire to destroy Israel by any means possible. History has shown this truth to the point that it is beyond the ability of any fair and honest observer to avoid, but these presumed messengers for peace are anything but fair or honest, they are coconspirators in the Arab conspiracy to destroy Israel and, if possible, the entirety of the Jewish People. The one thing which has become obvious is that should Israel fail and its population destroyed, then the potential future of the Jewish faith would be relegated to a near oblivion with small cores of religious Jews holding on to what would otherwise be a dead faith.

 

This was an integral and clearly stated goal by the Arab League and in the Khartoum Resolution of September 1, 1967 where the three no’s became the resolute avenue in the pursuit of the destruction of the Jewish State. The actual resolution which can be read here set forth what became known as the three no’s which stated that the Arab states would observe no formal peace treaty and no direct negotiations and no recognition of Israel. This agreement was broken only once when President Anwar Sadat of Egypt negotiated and reached a peace accord with Israel’s President Menachem Begin in what was the Camp David Accords ending the state of war between Egypt and Israel as of September 17, 1978. For breaking the three no’s Anwar Sadat paid with his life as he was assassinated on October 6, 1981, just over three years after reaching a peace with Israel when during the annual victory celebration he was shot along with a vast number of people in the formal reviewing stands including eleven others killed outright or suffered fatal wounds, including the Cuban ambassador to Egypt, an Omani general, and a Coptic Orthodox bishop and twenty-eight were wounded, including Vice President Hosni Mubarak, Irish Defense Minister James Tully, and four US military liaison officers. These three no’s have been observed via a specific series of accommodations and variations allowing for skirting the letter while accommodating the spirit of the Khartoum Resolution. The compliance to the three no’s of the Khartoum Resolution and the rest of its stipulations is behind the complete refusal of the Arabs to reach a peace despite the Israelis having at least twice meeting or exceeding the demands relayed by Yasser Arafat to President William Jefferson Clinton during the negotiations in Paris where Israeli President Ehud Barak which upon being told that the Israeli President had agreed to meet the conditions for peace even to splitting Jerusalem right along the Green Line boundary from before the 1967 Six Day War where Israel had liberated Jerusalem along with Judea and Samaria from Jordanian occupation he simply walked out refusing to even make a responding additional demand straight to his awaiting car which he had arranged to make ready just in the case that the Israelis might actually make the sacrifices he had thought beyond acceptable. Arafat showed no surprise likely because he realized that President Clinton might actually convince Israeli President Barak that this was the best chance for peace and the Israelis would make the necessary sacrifice for peace and so he knew he would need to beat a hasty prearranged retreat so as not to be caught in a compromised position and have to actually sign an agreement. It was the awaiting vehicle with the motor running and the driver at the wheel allowing Yasser Arafat to make his get-away before Secretary of State Madeline Albright could catch up with him and corner him demanding an explanation. Arafat was on his jet back to Jordan within an hour avoiding any potential interception by President Clinton and never did Arafat ever make an explanation to the American President. So, let these angels of peace alight on their gentle wings and draw from Mahmoud Abbas a specific description of what he would demand in order to make peace. When he refuses to make the same potentially problematic misstep made by Yasser Arafat and actually deceive these merchants of peace and give a response which he is assured in his mind the Israelis would never make such sacrifice for peace because he learned from the Arafat embarrassment of turning down the exact stipulations laid out for peace because the Israeli desire for peace actually made them stretch to their breaking-point in order to have peace, so Abbas will never present what he demands for peace because to do so would reveal that the Arabs do not want peace, they desire Israel’s extermination and nothing less.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

How Obama has Forced the World to Change for the Better

 

There are those who claim that President Obama has been a disaster both at home and in foreign policy. Let us look at domestic policy and accomplishments and resolve those first. The largest area of agreements are President Obama’s signature policy accomplishment according to most, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), aka Obama Care, and the Presidents most recent controversy with his announced intended amnesty of illegal immigrants should they be able to prove they meet requirements generally described criteria which will be defined through not Presidential Executive Actions but through merely ‘memos’ sent to Cabinet Secretaries to implement these changed definitions of policies and not changes of actual policies. The much maligned ACA may be established law as its defenders claim makes it sacrosanct and thus untouchable. Actually, it is as touchable as was the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution which was later repealed by the Twenty-First Amendment to that very same Constitution. So, there is precedent of the highest order that laws can be overturned, amended, redefined or altered in ways approaching uncountable and the ACA is not an exception. If the American people express an overwhelming and honest majority demanding the ACA be repealed, it will eventually be repealed, but only by such pressures being maintained until the repeal or redefinition of the changes within meet the people’s expectations. The immigration amnesty can be altered simply by finding a middle ground with legislation and holding President Obama to his promise to revoke his immigration ‘memos’ and sign the Congressional immigration reform legislation once it reaches his office. Further, if the President refuses to sign a truly compromise and rational approach which the American people have heard explained and support, then that veto can be overruled through constitutionally defined votes of both houses of Congress. Finally, the Congress can also prevent the implementation of President Obama’s immigration ‘memos’ by simply interceding and cutting off any federal funding of those changes and allowing them to die on the vine. So, anything that President Obama has done in domestic policies can be altered, repealed, amended, defunded or otherwise neutered by the Congress or potentially by the courts even if it needs to be taken to the Supreme Court making those alterations to the American legal fabric more compatible with the desires of the American people.

 

This leaves us with the effects and affects President Obama and his policies and actions have had on our world. The biggest problem caused by President Obama on the world’s stage was the damages he caused to the trust that both America’s allies and enemies could have in the promises made by any individual President because of the many standing policies which President Obama either ignored or worked with a great animosity and actually reversing previous American constants in foreign policy. Because many NATO countries came to fear that the United States no longer was there to protect them, they began to arm themselves and take on defense for themselves and many met the demanded minimal investments as required as a percentage of their budgets and national wealth on those defenses. Other nations such as Japan, Philippines, Israel, Taiwan and South Korea also realized that the promises made by previous administrations and even treaties may not be fulfilled to the extents they had always been guaranteed in word and actions including cancellation of joint exercises, the withholding of arms, changing promised arms sales replacing the weapons systems like aircraft and submarines with similar but lesser capable systems as well as actually cancelling some already planned and promised radar systems which were replaced with promises to have similar capabilities in place using naval systems or orbital surveillance satellites. No matter what good may come as nations react to a new reality where the United States can no longer be relied upon to keep its word and live up to promises to protect them from deadly threats or simply meet promised sales or stationing of resources, but they now know that promises from any President of the United States becomes null and void as soon as he leaves office and it depends upon the whims and fancies of his successors on into perpetuity. This alone will damage the United States and its foreign policy for decades, even centuries and potentially forever if the Obama perfidy is recalled into the distant future.

 

Now perhaps a closer look at the individual crises which have resulted to date and will likely play a large part of the historical legacy of President Obama’s two terms and its foreign policy and the ripples they have caused. First to examine Japan, Philippines and South Korea and their similar reactions and new realities they face due to President Obama’s foreign policy changes. The primary adversaries these three nations face is obviously China who has been developing advanced weapons systems, upgrading their military capabilities on the land, the sea and in the skies. Their other main adversary who is extremely unpredictable and potentially dangerous is North Korea with its new leader, Kim Jung Un who murdered his own Uncle for reasons which are unknown. With both of these adversaries possessing nuclear weapons, and with China developing a deep sea capable navy, what is often referred to as a blue water navy, these nations used to depend upon the United States and her nuclear threat to balance the nuclear potential threat from China and North Korea. With their faith and assurances broken, at the very least both South Korea and Japan have started to consider whether developing their own nuclear arsenals might be an idea whose time has come. Furthermore, both the Philippines and Japanese have conflicting claims for Islands located between them and China that China also makes claims to. This has caused a great potential for conflict to break out should the Chinese decide to exercise her ownership while the Philippines or Japan also have troops on exercises on the disputed Islands. The conflict potentially brewing for Japan is over the Senkaku Islands which the Chinese claim calling them the Diaoyu Islands. The Philippines dispute is over the Spratly Islands which the questions of ownership is also contested with Brunei, China, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam. And finally there is the problem caused by China claiming the entirety of the South China Sea which is heavily navigated water as it is the central leg of almost every trade route from Southern Asia to Western Asia, Hawaii, the Americas and the Panama Canal. Should either South Korea or Japan decide to go nuclear and develop nuclear arsenals, then the world will then contain two more nuclear armed nations and might spawn North Korea to expand their nuclear capabilities which would make the unpredictability of North Korean young, homicidal, vicious dictator Kim Jung Un even more threatening and of much greater concern for both Japan and the Philippines.

 

Taiwan has all of the same concerns as do Japan and the Philippines. The difference is that unlike the Philippines and Japan, Taiwan ranks mainland China as their greatest concern and threat. This is most likely due to the fact that China has already declared that Taiwan is simply another province of China which they intend to restore and place under Beijing’s control. One of the items which Taiwan was depending on was for the United States selling them a number of highly advanced submarines. Former President George W. Bush April 2001 offered Taiwan a substantial arms package which included eight diesel-electric submarines. Facing the problem that the United States has not designed or built diesel-electric submarines they faced a design problem which they were unable to solve simply by purchasing the plans and schematics of a European ally’s submarine but were turned down. After an exhaustive and determined search, come late 2004 the United States presented plans which included consideration for building the diesel-electric submarines for Taiwan from scratch. In early January of 2010, President Obama had his Defense Department announced a new offer of an arms package for Taiwan which did not include any submarines of any sort. This about-face greatly shocked and distressed the Taiwan defense officials. Taiwan’s reaction was to begin their own ability for building the most modern and advanced diesel-electric submarines on their own and have set out in that direction. The difficulty most nations reported in providing any military aid to Taiwan was their fear of provoking Chinese ire which has been growing in its potential recently.

 

Then there was the ready to be installed and promised placement of a radar and anti-missile battery system already agreed upon and the places were set aside in both Czech Republic and Poland. The reasons explained and guarantees given to Russia and the other nations in the area, that they were not the targeted areas, which would have been their primary concerns, but that the system was being placed in these two countries was for defense of any missiles launched from Iran towards Europe or even the United States and Canada. Russia was nervous but ready to accept the missile interceptors as the mere ten interceptors would be next to useless if they were to attempt to prevent an all-out Russian missile launch. By the end of President George W. Bush leaving office the only step left was to pack up the systems and ship them to be set up by American troops with aid from the two nations of Poland and the Czech Republic. President Obama took office and initially did not act or even press any steps to transit the systems to Europe. President Obama along with then Secretary of State Clinton were busy initially with the reset they were planning to reach with Russia. Finally, in September 2009, newly elected and still within his first year as President, Obama cancelled the entire system and promised to leave an AEGIS Destroyer in the eastern half of the Mediterranean Sea. This cancellation of the radar and anti-missile system was not taken well and considered to be a huge betrayal of their trust and as accepted allies. The promise of keeping a naval vessel to replace an entire system was seen an inadequate and less reliable as the ship, even one of the advanced and new AEGIS Destroyers, would not be capable of having its rockets placed in central Europe as there was no accessible body of water. This was also a broken trust and further proof that the United States has been basically changed and could no long trust the promises from one administration to the next administration as they could only take the promises of the President of the United States to have their weight and veracity disappear with the swearing-in ceremony of the next President.

 

And finally there is Israel where the changes signal an alignment change which they had best internalize if Israel has any plans for permanence. The changes in the United States relations with Israel were startling and shocked many an Israeli. The withholding of critical resupply of weapons and ammunition during the Gaza operation Defensive Shield was reminiscent of the delay in permitting resupply during the Yom Kippur War in October 1976 by President Nixon under the advice of Secretary of State Kissinger. The difference this time was the fact that President Obama added an additional review stage where it must be approved by the State Department after the Pentagon had cleared any supplies, provisions, replacement parts, weapon systems and even aircraft. Forcing any provisions of a military nature to also be granted the approval of the State Department places all military to military agreements and assurances given Israel all voided and allows for the Arabists who have infiltrated deeply into the State Department to interdict any resupply or even initial supply of armaments being shipped to Israel. Add into the mix the open hostility and animus shown to the Prime Minister of Israel as well as many Israeli politicians was another sign that all was not well between Jerusalem and Washington. Then there have been the silent demands on the leadership of Israel which has forced a silent building freeze, refraining security police and the IDF by insisting on Israeli rules of engagement, demanded that the Israeli government back away from any restrictions to Muslim access to the Temple Mount or in resolving the continuous rioting by Muslims while all the time refusing Jewish prayer and even access to the Temple Mount which is the most sacred place for Jews in the world and further demanded that Israel make concession in order to meet all of the demands of Mahmoud Abbas. These overt and far reaching plans by the United States to hamstring Israel and force them to all but surrender completely to the Palestinians demands and allow Muslims to act and enjoy every conceivable freedom even from the law while the Jews are to be treated as if they were Dhimmis within an Islamic state have even turned much of the Israeli public to question whether America is still an ally or has the good and solid relations become a memory from the distant past. There are those in Israel who now believe that the United States has turned on their homeland accusing them of taking the side of Israel’s enemies and joined their efforts to destroy Israel. The one place that thus far the United States has not betrayed the trust of Israel is the United Nations Security Council where the veto of the United States has very often been the savior required while much of the rest of the nations represented on the Security Council vote almost religiously to condemn Israel no matter what the charges or evidence. Should the United States ever break this trust, then the Israelis will know that there has been such a change that they can no longer count on anybody in the United Nations Security Council to mount sufficient, if any, opposition to the assaults upon Israel within that body just as nobody can save Israel from endless condemnations from every element of the United Nations. Potentially the worst entity when it comes to Israel would have to be the United Nations Human Rights Council which has as part of its operations a stipulation for them to issue a condemnation of Israel at the beginning of every session before they even conduct the reading of the minutes from the previous meeting. The one truth which is easily witnessed from as far as Jerusalem is the support and warmth of the feelings of the American people for Israel. This devotion and support for Israel is one of the things which has appeared to only grow as the Administration has slid further and further from Israel. Their support and devotion are highly treasured across all the lands and peoples of Israel.

 

The question in all of these nations’ minds is will the United States they knew return once it comes into new management with the next President. Then what jumps to the front of their minds is what are the possibilities that there may be President after President where the United States runs hot and cold in their treatment of each nation. Their greatest fear would be the United States not bouncing back to the familiar relations and traditional allies. The one probably permanent change caused to be implemented by the drastic changes experienced over the past six years has been the realization that even the most powerful nation which had been the greatest protector of freedoms, democracy, human rights and progress can falter and vanish for all intents and purposes leaving the world scrambling to cope with the collapse of what had appeared to be the natural order in the world. Now we do not have to imagine a world without the United States as we have been living in such a world where the United States was leading from behind rather than boldly going forth to support truth and justice, or at least profits, commerce and unfettered trade routes.

 

Beyond the Cusp