Beyond the Cusp

November 16, 2014

Ramifications of European Rush to Recognition of Palestinian State

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 War,Absolutism,Act of War,Administration,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Appointment,Arab Appeasement,Arab League,Arab World,Arabs,Barbarian Forces,Battle of Tours,Blood Libel,Cabinet,Catherine Ashton,Charles "The Hammer" Martel,Civilization,Condemning Israel,Conflict Avoidnce,Consequences,Cyprus,Divided Jerusalem,Domestic NGOs,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Federica Mogherini,Forced Solution,Foreign Funding,Foreign Minister,Foreign NGOs,Gaza,Germany,Golan Heights,Government,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hate,Hevron,History,Holy Sites,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Intifada,Iranian Pressure,ISIS,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Islamic State,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,Jordan,Jordan River,Jordanian Pressure,Joseph’s Tomb,Judea,Judean Hills,Kever Yosef,Knifing,Kotel,Land for Peace,Leftist Pressures,Machpelah,Mahmoud Abbas,Media,Mediterranean Sea,Middle East,Murder Israelis,Muslim World,Muslims,Nazi,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Peace Process,Polish King John III Sobieski,Politicized Findings,Politics,Prime Minister,Promised Land,Promised Land,Protect Citizenry,Rachel's Tomb,Recognize Israel,Response to Terrorism,Roadmap,Samaria,San Remo Conference,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secular Interests,Security,Seige of Vienna,Sharia Law,Sinai,Six Day War,Stabbing,Statehood,Syria,Temple Mount,Terror,Third Intifada,Threat of War,Two State Solution,United Nations Presures,United States Pressure,Victims,War of Independence,West Bank,Western Wall,World Opinion,World Pressures,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 3:10 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

European nations are showing eager excitement over who will be the next nation to signal their approval for the formation of a Palestinian state despite any concerns for the ramifications or difficulties such may represent. This has been spurred by the Swedish government having formally recognized the Palestinian state. They are the third Western European nation to do so after Malta and Cyprus who had followed the lead of South American nations Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia, Uruguay, Chile and Peru. This has had the impetus to send ripples through the remainder of the European countries and with the obvious pressures and support for a Palestinian state being so ham-handedly pushed by recently appointed European Union Foreign Minister Federica Mogherini during her introductory weeks in her new posting. Who would have ever thought that Lady Catherine Ashton might be missed? The coming European rush to excitedly etch out their ‘principled stand’ for the recognition of a Palestinian state will rush headlong ignoring any potential ramifications or harms their actions may produce. These recognitions in many nations will simply be non-binding votes affirming the Parliamentary support for the formation of a Palestinian state as the necessary votes or support of the Prime Minister stand in the way of an actual binding recognition, though this is not universally true as proven in Sweden. Still, these votes will have an immediate effect across Europe and will only serve to quicken the anti-Semitic attacks which have been on the increase already on the continent. What has also been an interesting item to note is that some of these recognitions from South America are lacking in stating recognized borders or even naming a capital city for the Palestinian state they claim they recognize. This does leave such recognitions to be quite lacking in any means for enforcement, not that any of the European nations would be eager to send troops to enforce their recognitions either even if they did actually state what they desired for recognized borders and such. It will be an embarrassment when the inevitable cries come from Mahmoud Abbas and he appraises his ambassadors across the European continent to demand the nations who have so boldly recognized the Palestinian state provide troops to enforce the borders and sovereignty of that very same entity. What a pickle that will create as many European nations would be hard pressed to enforce their own borders, let alone anyone else’s borders.

 

Still, there will be other embarrassments which will result from this headlong rush to grant some form of recognition for any potential future Palestinian state other than soured relations with the already existent state of Israel. There will be a quickening of the lashing out against the European Jewish population which was already picking up momentum with, oddly enough, Sweden being amongst the most dangerous of places to be a Jew. French Jewish organizations are frantically warning the French government of this potential ramification should they follow through even with a symbolic recognition. There was an assault on a Jewish man in Antwerp, Belgium where, according to the European Jewish Congress, the attacker “ran towards two Hassidim who were on their way to the synagogue, stabbed one of them in the throat and got away.” This was simply the latest of the reported assaults upon European Jews who have been victims of being assaulted for no other reason other than their being Jewish. These assaults are only the tip of an iceberg which includes taunts, firebombing of Synagogues and Jewish schools, daycares, senior centers and other institutions across Europe. Similar anti-Semitic attacks as have occurred in Europe have also been reported, but to a lesser extent, in the United States and Canada. In Germany, the neo-Nazi ‘Die Rechte’ Party demanded Mayor Ullrich Sierau of the city of Dortmund provide them a list of the city’s Jews and the Jews living in its surroundings, along with their addresses, a request which was fortunately refused. There will be those within the European populations who will see these ratifications of Palestinian statehood as an assault on Israel and even interpret them as signaling the end of Israel and ratification for the end of Judaism and take actions onto themselves towards that end. These political acts cannot have a positive influence on the Jewish communities who already are facing increasing attacks and antagonisms as the evils of anti-Semitism have not only returned to Europe, but appear to be gaining general acceptance amongst certain entities and social groups which had previously remained under the radar and refrained from acting out of fear or simply the social stigma against open hatred or acts against Jews. These official governmental statements, even if only symbolic, will appear to be an approval for such groups to become more active and potentially emerge from their hidden backroom enclaves into the open public and even seek political representation no longer fearing any social stigma for their once forbidden hatreds.

 

There will be those who will want to claim that such fears are simply the attempt to influence against recognition of the Palestinian right to have their own state. The weird thing is that Israel has not been the primary obstacle to a Palestinian state, not originally and not since the 1967 war when Israel gained control of previously held Arab lands. Here is the history once again, this time in a bare bones look. In November of 1947 the United Nations General Assembly passed a non-binding referendum suggesting a partitioning of the remainder of the British Mandate into an Arab and a Jewish state. The Arab League refused this partition and went to war to eradicate Israel and failed. In 1964 Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas along with the assistance of the KGB formed the PLO which declared their intent to liberate Palestine which they defined as Israel as there were no ‘occupied lands’ other than the original state of Israel. In June 1967 Egyptian President Nasser along with Syria threatened Israel’s destruction after which came the Six Day War which Jordan then joined the attack on Israel in the second day and by its conclusion Israel gained control of the Sinai, Golan Heights, Gaza and the West Bank. Israel made peace with Egypt which surrendered Gaza to Israel. Israel made peace with Jordan who surrendered the West Bank to Israel who returned their ancient and historic names of Judea and Samaria. Subsequently, Yasser Arafat complained that Jordan had actually bequeathed the West Bank to the Palestinians, a claim the King of Jordan granted as he desired no confrontation with Palestinians as his nation has a majority Palestinian population. The United States pressured Israel into permitting the return of Arafat and his henchmen with the signing of the Oslo Accords. The Palestinians have never made any changes to their charters as required in the ratification of the Oslo Accords which technically means they Oslo Accords have actually been in a state of nullification and never actually enforceable. Should Israel press the matter the Oslo Accords would fold but at this date such would create a firestorm similar to what is building as a direct result of the charge from across Europe to reward Palestinian violence with a state. The main obstacle to the Palestinian having their own state has been the Palestinian leadership who demand that they will only accept a state if it includes all of Israel and unless their state includes the destruction of Israel they prefer to scream and commit violent acts in a terror war they believe will either drive the Jews from all the lands or the world will force the Jews to give them all the lands from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Listen to the chants at the next rally for the Palestinians when it comes to your town or nearby college campus and you will hear this chant, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” What did you honestly think that meant?

 

Here is a dirty little secret, the entire world could ratify and recognize a Palestinian state with the 1949 Armistice Line* with East Jerusalem as its capital and that would not allow for the Palestinian state to be formed. Even should Israel finally give-in and agree and the Palestinians would make some claim which would prevent the formation of their state and, of course, blame Israel for the difficulty. They would lay claim to an additional piece of land or object to the stipulation that anybody be permitted to visit the holy sites within their lands or some other demand as it will always be something. The Palestinians have received offers to found their state in ninety-five percent of Judea and Samaria (West Bank), all of Gaza and with most of East Jerusalem as their capital city which was refused by Yasser Arafat resulting from the efforts of the Clinton Administration as part of the Camp David Summit and then in a desperate last minute effort by President Clinton himself in what was referred to as the Taba Summit. The European leaders and politicians should take a long hard look at the herculean efforts put forth by President Clinton who put more effort and placed his name directly upon the efforts going beyond any outside politician or head of state towards finding a solution only to be initially accepted by both sides only to have Yasser Arafat find some minutia he claimed to desire clarification and then to blow-up the entire effort in a pretend explosive upheaval over the explanation he received. Arafat knew exactly what he had agreed to when it was presented to him and to what I suspect is to be President Clinton’s credit, I believe he pretended the offer claiming he had not been able to force the Israelis to agree and was seeking to gain Arafat’s agreement of intention and full acceptance in order to further pressure the Israelis knowing full well that had Arafat known the Israelis had already agreed to the offer, that Arafat would have refused to accept the offer. Arafat agreed to the offer as he was convinced that the Israelis would never have accepted to grant him virtually any and everything he had ever demanded and assuredly they would refuse this offer, they had already agreed and had told President Clinton they would accept this deal if Arafat would. That placed Arafat in a tight spot as any Palestinian leader who ever accepted anything short of the destruction of Israel would be set upon and slaughtered by the very people they have taught and instilled a ravenous all-consuming hatred of Israel who would see such a deal as a betrayal of the highest order. That was the reason behind Arafat finding something which he demanded a full explanation and clarification despite having fully known the minutest of details as to what he had accepted, he was not a careless person who was oft to act without fully planning every little detail beforehand, and knew that accepting peace with Israel would have been the end of his life and he would have been murdered and disgraced forever held in highest contempt by the Palestinian people and much of the Arab world.

 

This is also what Abbas faces and why he will never accept any peace with Israel even if it has the appearances of having been force fed the Israelis against their will. In all honesty, if the Europeans could through their actions establish a final peace whereby the Palestinians accepted their statehood and forgot their hunger for the destruction of the Jewish state and the bloodletting they expect to fulfill upon their eventual victory over Israel and their conquest of the Jewish state, then the Israelis would likely thank the Europeans for managing the impossible. Thus far, every offer the Israelis have made to the Palestinians has had three points which they have completely rejected out of hand. These are the recognition of Israel as the state for the Jewish people, allowing freedom for all persons to visit the holy sites in Jerusalem (never mind the rest of Judea and Samaria which hold many of the holiest of sites for Judaism such as the Machpela, burial cave holding the burial of the Jewish patriarchs and matriarchs outside Hevron, Joseph’s Tomb, Rachel’s Tomb and hundreds of other sites) including the Temple Mount, and to end all hostilities and consider the peace as a final peace between our peoples. Mahmoud Abbas has sworn that he will never allow for any end to the terror war against Israel until all of Palestine from the river to the sea has been liberated. The Palestinians do not desire a state living next to the Israelis in peace and security, they demand their state instead of Israel and demand that their state replace Israel and that the Jews be destroyed or delivered back into exile, except for Hamas whose charter states their desire not only to destroy Israel and murder the Jews within but to then continue and murder the Jews throughout the world and finally to spread their version of Islam across the entire world under their rule. There really is no difference between the goals set by Hamas and those claimed by ISIS despite the desire of so many in the Western world to try and differentiate between the terror war against Israel and the terror war they face. So, go ahead Europe and try to placate the growing monster which you have nurtured within your borders, but be warned, they are not able to be placated and will not rest until they are dancing on the grave of Europe as you know it. Once upon a time Europe knew who they were and what the world required for them to remain who they were, no longer apparently as they have become a shell of their former selves. In the various states of society, armies are recruited from very different motives. If I may, a question posed and an answer offered. What will it take to propel the civilized to stand and protect that which civility has fashioned, built and established, from a code of conduct to buildings scraping the skies and roads beyond the horizons leading to wonders on every shore? For the answer, a quote from Edward Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume II, Chapter XVII. “Barbarians are urged by the love of war; the citizens of a free republic may be prompted by a principle of duty; the subjects, or at least the nobles, of a monarchy, are animated by a sentiment of honor; but the timid and luxurious inhabitants of a declining empire must be allured into the service by the hopes of profit, or compelled by the dread of punishment.”

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

 

* There is no such monstrosity as the 1967 border and only the armistice lines which when agreed upon after the failed war to annihilate the nascent Jewish state the morning after her founding was delineated to be the demarcation of the front lines at the noon hour of the last day set for the war by the United Nations. The Arab League and Arab nations in the armistice made one particularly unusual demand that the armistice lines would never be used to form a border for the Jewish state, ever. This was their way of being able to continue to claim there was no actual state of Israel because it did not have one of the necessary requirements for an actual state, a defined border. This is what is behind their insistence to this day that Israel does not exist, that and wishful thinking. (see Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States)

 

 

September 18, 2014

Turkey Needs to Prove They Belong in NATO Now

Filed under: Absolutism,Administration,Africa,Air Support,Al Nusra Front,al-Qaeda,Amalekites,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab League,Arab Winter,Arab World,Arabs,Armed Services,Arms Transfer,Army,Attack,Barbarian Forces,Beheading,Belgium,Blood Libel,Britain,Cabinet,Calaphate,Caliphate,Caliphate,Canada,Civilization,Clan,Colonial Possession,Conflict Avoidnce,Covert Actions,Domestic NGOs,Drone Strikes,Egypt,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Foreign Aid,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,France,Government,Great Britain,Greece,Hate,History,Hudna,Inteligence Report,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Iran,Iranian Military,Iraq,Iraqi Military,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Islamic State,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Italy,Jerusalem,Jihad,John Kerry,Kurdish Militias,Kurds,Middle East,Military,Military Advisors,Military Aid,Military Intervention,Military Option,Mohammed,Muslim World,Muslims,Peshmerga Militias,Politicized Findings,Politics,President Morsi,President Obama,President Sisi,Quran,Rebel Forces,Rebel Forces,Recep Tayyip Erdogan,Saudi Arabia,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secretary of State,Sharia,Sharia Law,Shiite,Special Forces,State Department,Sunni,Syria,Syrian Free Army,Syrian Military,Taqiyya,Terror,Threat of War,Tribe,Turkey,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Pressure,US Air Force,US Marines,US Navy,Victims,World Opinion,World Pressures — qwertster @ 3:18 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

United States Secretary of State John Kerry toured the nations of the Middle East seeking allies who would be willing to provide support for the operations spelled out by President Obama for dealing with ISIS. Secretary of State Kerry began his trip visiting NATO partner Turkey in hopes that as a fellow NATO nation they would eagerly support the efforts of their NATO ally. This assumption was sorely mistaken. While I was not privy to the look on Secretary Kerry’s face when Turkish President Erdogan, or whichever functionary was assigned to give the government refusal of intent to cooperate in any way, but I can take a good guess at his feigned surprised, you can knock me down with a feather astonishment look on the face of John Kerry. Why anybody would be surprised at the Turkish refusal should not be holding high position in the government of the United States as anybody holding even the smallest knowledge of recent history should remember that it was Turkey that refused to permit and United States, a NATO ally, troops to be deployed from Turkish soil when the Second Gulf War to remove Saddam Hussein from office was initiated. This prevented a second front from being established in the north of Iraq and permitted many top officials from the Hussein government to make their escape into Syria and possibly even into Turkey itself. The official commentary from the State Department simply stated that Turkey is opting out completely from the coalition and its efforts in Iraq and Syria. This should have further been expected considering Turkey being amongst the original and continuing supporters of ISIS.

 

The other problem is that Secretary of State Kerry is running into brick walls where many nations he has approached claiming they support the idea of what the United States has laid out but we are not really able to assist these efforts at this time. In Egypt President Sisi and the rest of the military hierarchy are not about to forgive President Obama and Secretary Kerry for the United States support for the Muslim Brotherhood and their continuing opposition of the military government which won the election after the army overturned the government of President Morsi as part of bringing an end to the massive demonstrations against the Muslim Brotherhood and President Morsi and their application of oppressive laws designed to make a path for Sharia and an end to the secular civilization in Egypt. There will be no support coming out of Egypt for anything coming from the Administration of President Obama, period. Secretary Kerry must have felt like he had won the lottery after his stops in Turkey and Egypt when Saudi Arabia and the Emirates promised financial support but denied to offer any boots on the ground against ISIS. Part of the reasons behind the Sunni refusals also is due to the threat to Shiite Iran that ISIS potentially poses and that ISIS is far more likely to take its fight to purify the true Religion of the Prophet, Sunni Islam, ISIS is predictably more likely to take their forces against Shiite Iran before they tackle the perceived impure governance by the Saudi Royal Family and the other leaders in the Emirates and across the Sunni world. Check back with Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and Egypt after SISI had been severely degraded after their successful overthrow of the Shiite Mullahs in Iran, providing there is any semblance of ISIS that survives an assault on Iran. Until then, the Sunni Arab leaders will not feel the threat and could see the potential for ISIS to, at the least, degrade the arch threat they face, Iran and their sycophants Syria and Hezballah. These results mean that President Obama and his grand plan will place all their expectations for victory on the two groups who have an immediate reason to take on this struggle, the remaining remnants of the Iraqi military and the Kurdish Peshmerga Militias who rescued many of the Yazidi peoples who were surrounded and threatened by ISIS forces and are defending the lands populated by Kurdish peoples. Of these two groups the Kurdish Peshmerga Militias are by far the more capable and likely the most capable of forces who make up their lack of numbers with a fierceness and steadfast convictions. The rest are unlikely to offer any ground forces, or even air support, without the United States also putting forces on the ground and even then they will be reluctant and only provide support troops who are able to serve in the rear and unable to perform combat duties with any measurable effect.

 

Still, the reluctance of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and other nations from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is to be expected as these nations are often willing to fight to the very last American troop before they will risk a single of their own troops. They might be willing to provide support troops or combat troops who would hold and guard supply depots and support areas such a motor pools but would be restricted as a condition of their deployment into the theater. Many understand that any problems in MENA locations which the United States determines as a threat, even if it also threatens the nations which are parts of MENA, will refuse to provide troops to fight anywhere outside of their own borders and support any numbers of United States troops being deployed to eradicate the threats to these nations and once the threat has passed they demand that the United States troops leave their territories until the next threat. All of this has been the exact scenario in countless confrontations ever since the Ottoman Empire was defeated as part of World War I and the division of those lands into individual nations over the following couple of decades. This was even the case for most of the fighting during World War I against the Ottoman Empire on behalf of the Arab tribes who resented Ottoman rule and mostly refused to join the battle. The main exception, and it was such an exception that it became the theme for a blockbuster movie, was the Arab revolt which was organized, held together, and led by a single British officer, and possible madman, Major T. E. Lawrence (often mistaken for Peter O’Toole). In all honesty, the film “Lawrence of Arabia” took so much liberty in depicting the Arabs as unorganized tribal forces who suffered from rivalries and discipline difficulties where the reality is most of those led by Major Lawrence were disciplined forces under direct command of their officers, uniformed, and many were captured initially fighting as part of the Ottoman Army and volunteered, initially demanding, to be permitted to fight to overthrow the Ottoman Turks. The movie engendered numerous law suits contesting how many actual people were portrayed to such inaccuracy that the families took umbrage and insult to their honor. There is also the fact that there were other British and French intelligence officers who, like Lawrence, led Arab units. The possible reason that the movie was centered around T. E. Lawrence was likely due to two factors, American journalist Lowell Thomas gave Lawrence much coverage in the West, particularly in the United States, and the extensive and self-aggrandized recounting of Major Lawrence’s accomplishments and importance found within his penned accounting titled, “Seven Pillars of Wisdom.” Maybe we could use another rather eccentric British officer about now, or maybe not.

 

The only actual effrontery which, though expected in this office, likely somewhat blindsided the Administration of President Obama would be the utter refusal to cooperate by the Turkish government. The government of newly elected and first publically elected President, Erdogan’s refusal not only to provide troops on the ground, but to refuse to provide air support, the use of Turkish airfields or even the use of Turkey itself to house troops or supplies or to launch strikes on ISIS in both Iraq and Syria should be taken as a virtual resignation from NATO as he has proven that under his guidance Turkey has split from NATO and moved closer to Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood. This should have been expected as this was the exact reaction and lack of consideration or cooperation which Turkey gave President George W. Bush for utilizing Turkish ground from which to launch a second front in the initial stages of the 2003 start to the Second Iraq War. Apparently the Turkish refusals were just as much a shock and surprise as they were a little over a decade ago. Perhaps President Obama had relied on two things, the fact that he believes he is the anti-Bush President and thus should succeed where President George W. Bush had failed, and that he considers Recep Tayyip Erdogan to be one of if not his closest friend and confidant amongst all the leaders in the world. Apparently the friendship felt by President Obama is not reciprocated nearly as much as he might have anticipated and hoped. Still, with what is reputed to be some of the finest information gathering abilities available to advise an American President, one would have thought that President Obama would have been advised on how poorly his hopes for coordination and cooperation his plan would be rejected by the Arab nations he was presumably offering to help and particularly he would have been informed that the only NATO ally was not going to be onboard with the plan. Why President Obama was not forewarned is a question whose answer we will never know.

 

Still the Turkish refusal to once again assist their NATO allies in efforts in the Middle East begs some serious questions. The first, most obvious and of paramount importance is why Turkey remains within NATO. Perhaps there is no means of removing a member once they have been accepted. The one obvious fact is that the experiment of allowing a nation which historically, since the fall of the Byzantine Empire, has sided with the Muslim and Arab forces of the world including being the central home to the last Caliphate, the Ottoman Empire, would be considered and granted membership in NATO, a Europe centered mutual defense organization. The reason has more to do with the when and why NATO was originally established. On April 4, 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, was established with twelve Western nations making up its membership; Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Great Britain, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United States. The organization was established to resist the pressures of the Soviet Union and their iron grab over Eastern Europe and to provide a united front which was to provide a greater defensive front for the individual nations by tying their defense against aggressions into the Three Musketeers pledge of all for one and one for all. A short period later on February 18, 1952, two additional states were granted membership; Greece and more importantly Turkey. The most obvious reason leading to the inclusion of Turkey in NATO was desirable as Turkey ruled over the Bosphorus and Dardanelles which are the two straights which control access to the Mediterranean Sea from the Black Sea which served as the southern route for Russian and Soviet Naval vessels, their western most all season port in the Crimean Peninsula. As the Soviet Union collapsed the reasoning behind NATO, and especially Turkey, should have dissipated leaving the entire alliance to the dustbin of history. But such treaties and similar large organizations, such as labor unions, find new but not necessarily improved, raison d’être. This has been the reality of NATO with it coming up with reason after reason as the years pass which its members generally agree are sufficient excuses to continue the organization. But now that the newest raison d’être is to provide a unified front and mutual protection against potential threats emanating out of Iran or any other threats across the Middle East, the consistent refusal by Turkey to permit any use of their lands and bases or to volunteer their troops or air force joining efforts in the Middle East. What the reason is for having kept Turkey as a member of NATO after their refusal, especially the manner in which they revoked permission with hours left before the invasion of Saddam Hussein’s Iran, causing the delay of the deployment of the forces which were to have assaulted Iran from the north and removing entirely the northern front from the strategy, potentially making the entire plan more likely to fail, is beyond reason and can only be attributed to the belief that the Turkish refusal to honor their obligations as a NATO ally was a once only event. With it now established as their policy and not an exception, there is absolutely no conceivable reason to permit Turkey to remain as a member in NATO and doing so is simply an endangerment to the entire membership of NATO. Somehow, it is very doubtful that their refusal again to cooperate in efforts by NATO ally members will have any consequences as any insult or antagonism of Western nations and alliances comes without consequences. Working contrary to the efforts and intentions of any other alliance or nation will definitely have immediate and serious consequences, especially efforts against, the Chinese, the Russians and the Arab and Muslim worlds. Working contrary to the United States is one of the few acts which has no apparent consequence, well, unless the nation refusing to obey the United States is Israel, the nation which appears to be held to a singular set of rules, consequences and restrictions with expectations of morality of actions on a scale beyond that applied anywhere else and to no other nation, even the United States though they come in a relative second place on the expectation scale imposed by such as the United Nations, the NGOs, the plethora of human rights organizations and the opinion of the web of nations.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

« Previous Page

Blog at WordPress.com.