Beyond the Cusp

March 21, 2015

Obama Forbid It Ever Coming to That

Filed under: Act of War,Administration,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab Authority,Arab League,Arab World,Arabs,Benyamin Netanyahu,Conflict Avoidnce,Core Beliefs,Domestic NGOs,Elections,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Government,Green Line,Hate,ICC,Internal Pressures,International Criminal Court,International Politics,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Interests,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish Temple,Jihad,Jordanian Pressure,Judea,Judean Hills,League of Nations,Leftist Pressures,Likud,Mahmoud Abbas,Middle East,Ministers,Muslim World,Muslims,Netanyahu,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Parliament,Parliamentary Government,Peace Partner,Peace Process,Peace Treaty,Politicized Findings,Politics,President Obama,Prime Minister,Samaria,San Remo Conference,Secular Interests,Six Day War,Statehood,Sykes-Picot,Terror,Threat of War,Tzipi Livni,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Pressure,Voting,World Opinion,World Pressures,Yasser Arafat,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 3:13 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Since the results of the Israeli elections were announced, the rumors coming out of Washington D.C. have been troubling to say the least. The singular item which has been part and parcel of every set of rumors has been the threat to no longer act in defense of Israel at the United Nations. As the United States can only veto resolutions effectively in the Security Council and Israel has effectively mostly ignored nonbinding resolutions while occasionally acting hurt or surprised, probably to amuse and entertain those who follow such events, the threats can only be about certain Security Council resolutions. This makes the question very simply, is President Obama intending to only permit Chapter 6 resolutions or has President Obama been driven so beyond the cusp that he intends to also stand aside or even support Chapter 7 binding and backed by military intervention resolutions, more often than not United States military force. It would be a very sad day that when the first combat troops from the United States deployed to Israel would be fighting against Israel in efforts to set borders establishing an Arab Palestinian state including cutting Jerusalem in half and setting up denial of rights for Jews to the majority of the ancient Jewish and Hebrew holy sites just as it was when Jordan occupied the heartlands of ancient Israel and Judea. This being done in the name of the American people, probably some of the greatest friends and supporters of Israel, is one of the most upsetting of ideas that before the current American leadership would have been unthinkable. There have been times when relations were tested such as when President Reagan did refuse to prevent the United Nations condemnation of Israel over their bombing of the Osirak reactor in Iraq before it was put online and producing bomb material for Saddam Hussein, something Israel was later thanked for when the United States was facing an Iraq without nuclear weapons. With the Iranian nuclear negotiations and the related fiasco, the whole reaction to the elections and Prime Minister Netanyahu’s address to Congress accepting Speaker of the House Boehner’s invitation has all been more of a panic over lost prestige than reasoned exception of intended slights.

 

There have been editorials claiming that the reaction by the President is exactly the kind of reaction a narcissist who also has fears and self-doubts and takes things so personally as if everything revolves around him and also any act is intentionally committed to affect him personally would react. Unfortunately for President Obama, I can honestly lay his concerns aside as neither my wife nor I had him in mind when we voted this past week. We apologize for not taking President Obama’s feelings into consideration but maybe he can take some solace in the fact that neither of us voted for Likud though we did support parties considered even more Zionist than Likud and have probably more hesitations and greater degrees of trepidation of a government led by Netanyahu as he has already proven that he cannot be trusted to keep a promise for more than a few days before wilting before the hurt feelings of President Obama. I realize that President Obama really wanted the next Israeli Prime Minister to be somebody other than Bibi, which meant Tzipi Livni and or Yitzhak Hertzog, because they would have consulted with President Obama before ordering their lunches for the day, let alone anything truly important. The truth is that President Obama is going to have to actually work at getting the Israeli Prime Minister to dance to his tune if Netanyahu manages to cobble together a coalition without breaking too many rules. The good news is that with the right threats combined with some heart felt anger mixed with a dash of well-stated demands and finally a no small amount of pleading, the next Israeli Prime Minister might act or at least appear to act just as President Obama desires.

 

Somehow I doubt that suggestion would sit too well with President Obama, so why not give him some sagely advice which might actually make things better rather than making fun of the situation. Here is an idea which nobody has ever attempted whose time may be due. Why not try to have Mahmoud Abbas present an actual written presentation of what he would accept as a solution and then ask the Israeli leader, once you have said document in hand, if he would make a counter proposal or possibly even accept the proposed solution as presented. I bet if you could get Mahmoud Abbas to actually tell the world exactly what he would accept and allow, then everybody could to see for themselves exactly what would be considered acceptable to the Palestinians. Thus far the Palestinian leadership from Yasser Arafat to Mahmoud Abbas and everybody accompanying this parade of malcontents has only had to say “no” to every offer from Israel and the entire world then demanded Israel surrender a little more. Then when that was also rejected the world pushed Israel again to surrender a little more. In the twenty years since Oslo Israel has been backed into a corner where there is no more to give and still survive. Israel cannot survive allowing the Palestinians to possess the Judean Hills overlooking Tel Aviv and the heart of modern Israel. Israel has played this game for too long. President Obama, have somebody read the San Remo Conference treaty to you and realize that is the International Law which defined Israeli borders. Those are the borders the world guaranteed Israel including the United States back in 1920, long before the Holocaust or anything else everybody loves to present as facts today. So, read that treaty to Mahmoud Abbas and tell him that should he make a reasonable demand of Israel in this his one opening to actually get his own state as long as he will be reasonable and considers the reality of the San Remo Conference and how that changes the hype around the Palestinians. This also affects the Palestinians going to the ICC; as if Israel is dragged to the ICC, they will simply lay a copy of the San Remo Conference treaty on the Judges’ tables and quietly await their decision as they interpret International Law in light of a treaty which had as signatories every member of the League of Nations even including Persia; you might know them better by their adopted name relating their presumed Aryan supremacy, Iran.

 

But instead of threatening the Israeli people and subjecting the world to an almost guaranteed conflagration which will most certainly follow any rocket barrage striking the greater Tel Aviv megalopolis, especially if any of downtown Tel Aviv and its skyscrapers in its central district were to be struck, causing thousands of deaths similar to the World Trade Center’s destruction in scope and numbers as any such assault would entail hundreds rockets in the initial few hours before Israel could respond adequately to end the attack. So, just a suggestion that for a change it be attempted to have the Palestinians present an actual proposal, I bet it will not be as easy as everyone claims. I know what the knee-jerk response will be, “Everybody already knows the Palestinians only want what is rightfully theirs.” Well, apparently President Clinton did not know what they wanted as he extracted what he thought was exactly what the Palestinians wanted and the result was Yasser Arafat bolting from the room in Paris and returning to his bunker and starting the Second Intifada as had been his plan from even before the negotiations had begun. So, just to satisfy the world’s curiosity as I am sure everybody would claim that this idea would be almost a no brainer as the Palestinians would be able to put their idea of a fair treaty down on paper and allow it to be presented to the Israelis with the understanding that if the Israelis accepted it then there would be an agreement and a signing within a week and if the Israelis did not agree at least the differences would finally be presented and the world can work with both parties from that point and reconcile any differences. But for nothing more than a change of agendas and demanding Israel make the offer, allow the Palestinians to start the ball rolling, we’ve rolled it far enough. We will wait for your answer and the presentation of the demands the Palestinians requested you make in their name, oh, and be just as demanding that they be fair and making an honestly presentable proposal and not just demand that they be given all of Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem and that Israel accept the right of return of five million Arabs as we all know that is a nonstarter. Then once you have a reasonable proposal from Abbas, call us, we’ll leave the line open for you.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Advertisements

August 10, 2013

Israel Should End Unreciprocated Concessions to Palestinians

The impending release of the first groups of terrorist prisoners of the one-hundred-four terrorist prisoners numbering twenty-six prisoners most of which are serving life or multiple life sentences and have Israeli blood on their hands is scheduled to take place before any real progress has been made. In return for their release the Palestinians have agreed to return to negotiations without any guarantee that they intend to reach any guaranteed results. If there has been any message the Israelis could deduce from statements and history of previous series of negotiations it would be that the Palestinians will remain in the negotiations until either they have glean every conceivable concessions which can be extracted from the Israelis at the current time or until they are actually called upon to make a concessions or fulfill a guarantee or stipulation to the Israelis at which point they will walk-out of the negotiations and stipulate unreasonably extreme demands of Israel before they will return to negotiations. These demands are ones they know full well that the Israelis will never agree to making and, for the most part, nobody would expect such concessions from the Israelis, at least not yet. Some examples are but not limited to, accept the right of return of five million plus Palestinian refugees into Israel providing them with suitable properties commensurate with those they claim they left in 1948 and also granting them citizenship, surrender all of East Jerusalem including the entire Old City and Temple Mount, allow the Palestinians open borders including free import of weaponry and training rights with other national armies, or combination demands such as building freeze in all of the contested lands and ending the embargo on Gaza completely including opening the Gaza City port and Gaza City International Airport. When Israel refuses to meet such demands then the Palestinians can claim that it was Israeli intransigence which brought the end to the negotiations and the Palestinians had simply called on Israel to make good on their obligations as expected by the Palestinians as they had made these requests multiple times in previous negotiations. Then we can expect the European, Arab, Muslim, Russian, and leftist mainstream media all restating the Palestinian position often times exactly word for word joining in on the condemnations of Israel for refusing to negotiate with good intentions and to show an honest desire for a real peace which Israel must realize they will need to make some sacrifices.

 

During this new round of negotiations the Israelis have been cajoled and pressured into releasing the aforementioned one-hundred-four terrorists who were serving life sentences in stages as the negotiations show progress which will be determined by United States Secretary of State John Kerry who will obviously be taking some of his directions from President Obama. Since all that Secretary of State Kerry and President Obama are focused on during these negotiations are the twin ends; the formation of a Palestinian state and a Nobel Peace Prize, an unprecedented second one for President Obama. Nowhere on either of their radars is any concern for a viable or defendable Israel and if anything along those lines is within their collective aims it would be a completely vulnerable Israel as that would make Israel totally dependent upon the rest of the world to keep them safe, an expectation which has little possibility of fulfillment. These are the reasons that Israel must change the methodology of the peace negotiations if they are going to protect their interests as it is obvious that few others who are directing these negotiations if any have Israeli interests within their list of necessary conditions to be achieved or even considered.

 

The new methodologies which Israel needs to insist become the new parameters for all of their negotiations with the Palestinians beginning immediately consists that Israel will no longer make any concession simply to entice the Palestinians to negotiate as this has proven to be counterproductive and has resulted in every instance as making concessions and receiving absolutely nothing in return. Furthermore, should attacks and other acts of terrorism be committed then negotiations will be delayed until a full week has passed without incident. Whenever there are breakthroughs or other advances made during negotiations, Israel will not commit to making any concessions until the advances or breakthrough agreements have been codified and signed by both sides in the form of a formal treaty binding on both parties. This is necessitated due to the practice of the Palestinians seeming to agree to take actions or allowances only to renounce any intention to meet these items when they leave the negotiations unless Israel meets other demands which were not part of agreements. By making each point, concession, accord, compromise or other forms of agreement codified and specifically defined including the obligations and rights of both sides and placing these definitions and agreements into formal treaty framing replete with a legal and proper signing before committing to acting on any concession, Israel will finally be assuring they are no longer making concessions after concession and receiving no return. This has been practices so extensively since the Oslo Accords were finalized in 1993 that the items left to negotiate are far fewer and Israel has compromised themselves almost to the point of complete surrender. The proof is the facts on the ground such as Gaza has been returned to Palestinian control, the Palestinian Authority has complete autonomy over Area A and acts as a semiautonomous body in area B and the two sides have come to a place where the only items remaining to be negotiated are the final core issues. Should Israel take this approach to negotiating then there will be real achievements and each concession will finally actually be a step towards peace and not just a further fleecing of Israel. This is a solution that would add validity to the negotiating which would force the two sides to make actual progress and if such results failed to be produced, the party refusing to negotiate in good faith will become easily determined. This is the only way that will produce progressive steps towards a final solution and put an end to the farcical ruse that has been perpetrated and tragically been passed off as a peace process.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.