Israel Matzav

Not much of a mystery

Steve Rosen asks what ought to be an obvious question and doesn't really provide an answer. The question is why President Obama is allowing 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen to get away with refusing to negotiate with Israel for the first time in nearly 20 years. The question is one that ought to be asked, but after reviewing a lot of different possibilities, Rosen doesn't give much of an answer. Instead, he throws the ball into Congress' court.

Members of Congress are starting to take notice of the administration's reticence to confront Palestinian intransigence. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), the incoming House Foreign Affairs Committee chairwoman, said on Dec. 23 of Palestinian leaders: "They know they don't have to do a darn thing; with this administration they will get a blank check, and they will always get helped out.… Try examining where they're using their money and where our U.S. dollars are going." Her Democratic counterpart, California's Howard Berman, the outgoing chairman of the committee, said a few days earlier, referring to Abbas's unilateral drive to seek early recognition of Palestinian statehood, "If they try to circumvent negotiations, they'll lose the support of a lot of people like me, and it will jeopardize their foreign aid as well."

As it happens, a statute is already in place, requiring sanctions against such violations of the solemn commitments the Palestinians made. The Middle East Peace Commitments Act of 2002 notes that "Resolution of all outstanding issues in the conflict between the two sides through negotiations" is one of the core commitments to which the Palestinian Authority has obligated itself, and it requires the president to notify Congress of such violations and impose penalties, which may include a "prohibition on United States assistance to the West Bank and Gaza." When it returns to Washington this month, the new Congress may not share Obama's reluctance to criticize Abbas. With the support of Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor, the new House in particular may be willing to do something about it.

Well, yes, but that doesn't mean that we don't need to understand why President Obama is treating Israel the way he is treating it, because only with that understanding can we counteract that treatment. The answer is here, but I doubt that Foreign Policy (which is generally pro-Arab) would publish it. Those of you who have not read the post at that link before should read it in full, but the bottom line is that President Obama regards Israel as "an aggressive, Western imperialist power exploiting indigenous people of color who simply wish to be free." And his 'moral conscience' won't brook that 'exploitation.'

Any Congressional attempt to deprive the 'Palestinians' of funding is doomed to failure, because Europe will just step in to the breach and make up the shortfall. What Congress needs to do is to attack President Obama's jaundiced view of the Jewish state and not just to play defense on funding.

Labels: Barack Obama, fierce moral urgency, Mahmoud Abbas, US Congress

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 11:25 AM