#ThanksObama... for making America's former allies into our allies
It's not just Israel that doesn't trust Barack Hussein Obama. And in one of the best examples of countries having interests rather than friends, a group of previously irreconcilable American allies has
joined together look out for their own interests in the waning days of the Age of Obama. Bret Stephens reports.
I’ve spent the better part of a week talking to senior officials,
journalists, intellectuals and politicians from across Israel’s
political spectrum. None of it was on the record, but the consistent
theme is that, while the Jewish state still needs the U.S., especially
in the form of military aid, it also needs to diversify its strategic
partnerships. This may yet turn out to be the historic achievement of Benjamin Netanyahu’s long reign as prime minister.
On Sunday, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon publicly shook hands with former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki al-Faisal at the Munich Security Conference. In January, Israeli cabinet member Yuval Steinitz
made a trip to Abu Dhabi, where Israel is opening an office at a
renewable-energy association. Turkey is patching up ties with Israel. In
June, Jerusalem and Riyadh went public with the strategic talks between
them. In March, Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi told the Washington Post that he speaks to Mr. Netanyahu “a lot.”
This
de facto Sunni-Jewish alliance amounts to what might be called the
coalition of the disenchanted; states that have lost faith in America’s
promises. Israel is also reinventing its ties to the aspiring Startup
Nations, countries that want to develop their own innovation cultures.
In October, Israel hosted Indian President Pranab Mukherjee
for a three-day state visit; New Delhi, once a paragon of the
nonaligned movement that didn’t have diplomatic ties to Israel for four
decades, is about to spend $3 billion on Israeli arms. Japanese Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe, who is personally close to Mr. Netanyahu, sees
Israel as a model for economic reinvention. Chinese investment in Israel
hit $2.7 billion last year, up from $70 million in 2010. In 2014,
Israel’s exports to the Far East for the first time exceeded those to
the U.S.
Then there is Europe—at least the part of it that is
starting to grasp that it can’t purchase its security in the coin of
Israeli insecurity. Greece’s left-wing Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras
used to lead anti-Israel protests. But Greece needs Israeli gas, so he
urges cooperation on terrorism and calls Jerusalem Israel’s “historic
capital.” In the U.K., Prime Minister David Cameron’s government is moving to prevent local councils from passing Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) measures against Israel.
All
this amounts to another Obama administration prediction proved wrong.
“You see for Israel there’s an increasing delegitimization campaign that
has been building up,” Mr. Kerry warned grimly in 2014. “There are
talks of boycotts and other kinds of things. Today’s status quo
absolutely, to a certainty, I promise you 100%, cannot be maintained.”
Except when the likely alternatives to the lousy status quo are worse.
Maybe we need to say #ThanksObama after all. Just not the way he expected. Heh.
Labels: Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Barack Hussein Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu, China, David Cameron, Greece, India, Japan, Moshe Yaalon, Turki al-Faisal
Yaalon's comments continue to reverberate
The politicians and the media continued to take sides
for and
against Defense Minister Moshe Boogie Yaalon's
Charles Krauthammer imitation over the weekend
. Add to that President Hussein Obama's temper tantrum insisting that Yaalon must
explicitly apologize. To me, at least, the debate over Yaalon's comments reflect a double standard both as compared with
US criticism of Israel, and as compared with how
other allies have criticized the United States. This is from the next-to-last link.
How about when that openness and honesty is not Washington
criticizing Israeli policy, but rather Jerusalem passing judgment on
Washington’s policies? Then, as was evident again this week with
Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon’s latest critique of American foreign policy, the US is far less forbearing.
For whatever the reason, the US cannot seem to tolerate words of criticism from Israel.
...
But this
time Ya’alon’s criticism was not personal at all. No mention of the
Nobel Prize or the messiah. It was, rather, a general critique of US
policies. It was also not stated in a high-profile public forum, but
rather in a private discussion that was leaked.
And what did he
say that was so egregious, that ignited the wrath of the administration
to such a degree that it trotted out an official to say that “given the
unprecedented commitment that this administration has made to Israel’s
security, we are mystified why the defense minister seems intent on
undermining the relationship?” On Iran, Ya’alon did not break any new
ground, criticizing the US for letting the Iranians off the ropes with
the current round of negotiations, and saying that Washington was being
out-negotiated by the Iranians. His line about the Iranians being
better negotiators in a Persian bazaar is one he has used often in the
past.
...
Where Ya’alon skated on thin ice was his comments about American military aid.
“The
aid must be put in proportion,” he said. “It is not really an American
favor, it’s an interest. It is not as if we only take, we also give not
a little,” he added, saying that Israel gives the US “quality
intelligence and technology.” Among the technological developments he
ticked off were the Iron Dome, the wings of the F-35 stealth fighter,
and the Arrow anti-ballistic missile – all Israeli inventions.
He said that with Israel, the US has an “aircraft carrier” in the Middle East which “begins in Metulla, and ends in Eilat.”
...
This week’s incident demonstrated again the administration’s very
thin skin when it comes to criticism from Israel. It seemed to go
beyond mere annoyance at Ya’alon’s comment about the aid. The defense
minister’s overall critique of the US policy seemed to step on a raw
nerve.
He gave voice to a trend many in the world are noticing:
Washington’s ability to bend the will of others to its desired goals is
diminishing.
But rather than getting furious at Ya’alon for
stating what for many is the obvious, the administration should consider
that if this is what a senior leader of one of its greatest friends in
the world is thinking – a friend that wants to see a powerful and
respected US – then what is going through the minds of those who do not
wish the US well.
The administration should also bear in mind
that Ya’alon is not some flaky, obscure minister who is easily
dismissed. According to a Channel 2 poll three weeks ago, taken on the
one-year anniversary of the government being sworn in, Ya’alon is the
most popular minister in the land. And that poll was taken after he
called Kerry messianic and obsessive.
Squeezing yet another
apology out of Ya’alon for hurt feelings risks ignoring his message –
and that message, even if clumsily delivered, is not one that should be
summarily dismissed, even if it is uncomfortable for some in
Washington to hear.
And what do
other allies say to the US?
Let’s see. I would assume that most of us would agree that
the United States, in seeing its brave soldiers die to stop the Taliban
from taking over Afghanistan, not to mention spending a trillion-odd
dollars in the war there, has done a great deal more for Afghanistan
than Israel. Yet, here is President Hamid Karzai’s official
pronouncement about the United States, just this past January 17:
“As a result of bombardment by American forces last night …
in Siahgird district of Parwan province, one woman and seven children
were martyred and one civilian injured. The Afghan government has been
asking for a complete end to operations in Afghan villages for years,
but American forces acting against all mutual agreements … have once
again bombarded a residential area and killed civilians.”
This follows a pattern of Karzai of attacking American
troops—who have saved his country from Taliban Neanderthals—as killers,
rapists, marauders, etc. Just two days ago this wretched ingrate
actually had the temerity to say that in the 12 years NATO troops have
been in Afghanistan his country has gone backward. Yet, I have searched
in vein on Susan Rice’s Twitter feed for a condemnation of Karzai for
his absolutely disgusting remarks about our heroes in uniform.
Less so have I found a State Department spokesman
condemning the Afghan president as having no right to falsely accuse
American troops.
No, it seems that Israel alone is prevented from offering a dissenting opinion from the United States.
Here's
another example:
The State Department downplayed the appearance of mounting geopolitical friction between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia on Monday — a day after the former head of Saudi intelligence assailed the Obama administration’s shifting policies in the Middle East and accused Washington of waffling on Syria and Iran.
“The U.S. and Saudi Arabia have a long and close strategic partnership,” said Marie Harf, the State Department’s
deputy spokesman. “One of the hallmarks of a good partnership is the
ability to have quite frank conversations, even, maybe, when we
disagree about these very important issues.”
Her comments marked the second time in as many months that the Obama administration has sought to paper over tensions with Riyadh, and were in response to harsh words from Prince Turki al-Faisal.
Prince Turki lambasted the administration during a speech Sunday in Monaco
at the World Policy Conference, an annual event that brings together
officials and analysts from the Middle East, North Africa and Europe.
He accused President Obama of reneging on promises and asserted that Washington’s attempt to make peace between Israel and the Palestinians will be in vain if Mr. Obama does not set clear guidelines for the process — and sticks to them.
“We’ve
seen several red lines put forward by the president, which went along
and became pinkish as time grew, and eventually ended up completely
white,” Prince Turki said, according to a report by the New York Times. “When that kind of assurance comes from a leader of a country like the United States, we expect him to stand by it.
You don't think there's a double standard now, do you?
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, double standards, Hamid Karzai, John Kerry, Moshe Yaalon, our friends the Saudis, Turki al-Faisal
Saudis happy Livni in charge of 'negotiations' because she'll keep Netanyahu from being 'difficult'
Israel's chief
negotiator bottle washer Tzipi Livni
met in Germany over the weekend with Saudi Prince and former ambassador to the United States Turki al-Faisal. Among other things, Turki told her that he's glad that she's 'in charge' of the 'negotiations' because she will prevent Prime Minister Netanyahu from
being difficult looking out for Israel's interests.
The Saudi prince, the former ambassador to Washington who also headed
his government’s intelligence apparatus, is thought to be a powerful
emissary in the eyes of Western diplomats given his intimate familiarity
with Riyadh’s foreign policymakers.
Turki and Livni discussed the Saudi peace initiative. Introduced in
2002 under the auspices of the Arab League, the proposal entails full
normalization between Israel and the surrounding Arab countries in
exchange for a withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines.
According to
Israel Radio, Turki told Livni that the House of Saud was pleased she
was named as head of the negotiating team in talks with the Palestinians
since it would “ensure that [Prime Minister Binyamin] Netanyahu would
not be so difficult.”
Livni responded that she viewed the Arab
initiative as “very positive,” adding that the Israeli leadership
“believes that the price of not reaching an agreement is steeper than
reaching an agreement.”
I wonder why Turki wasn't willing to meet with her openly.... /sarc
Labels: Middle East peace process, Saudi Arabia, Saudi plan, Turki al-Faisal, Tzipi Livni
'Our friends the Saudis' to go nuclear
Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal has warned of 'calamitous consequences' resulting from an attack on Iran, and is therefore once again urging
a 'nuclear-free zone' in the Middle East that
Israel give up its alleged nuclear weapons.
Prince Turki, speaking to an elite group of academics and faculty members at the prestigious Alfaisal University in Riyadh, said a zone free of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) was the best way to get Iran and Israel on board and to force them to abandon nuclear programs.
“Such a zone must be accompanied by a rewards regime for those countries in the region that join the zone,” said the prince, while stressing and calling for “a nuclear security umbrella guaranteed by all the permanent members of the UN Security Council for the region.”
...
Replying to a question about the possibility of an attack on Iran to force it to roll back its nuclear program and the impact of such an action, Prince Turki reiterated that the impact will be “calamitous … cataclysmic, not just catastrophic.”
He said that Iranian actions have provoked worldwide opposition but at the same time suggests that Iran's nuclear program is being singled out, while Israel is being given a clean chit. Any unilateral decision to launch a military attack aimed at halting the nuclear program of Iran could have huge consequences, he warned.
He, however, expressed his grave concerns that if Israel and Iran acquire a range of nuclear weapons, they would unleash a cascade of nuclear proliferation that would significantly destabilize the region and possibly destroy efforts to establish a nuclear weapons free zone in this part of the world.
To this end, he also noted that the last year's nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference included in its final document a call for the establishment of a Middle East zone free of all weapons of mass destruction.
When all of the Arab countries plus Iran get rid of all their weapons of mass destruction in a verifiable manner, we can talk about getting rid of our alleged nuclear weapons. By the way, we've had our alleged nuclear weapons for 50 years and have never even threatened to use them, so I don't think we're the problem.
In other news, 'our friends the Saudis' announced a plan to spend $100 billion to build 16 nuclear plants. Does the world's largest oil exporter really need nuclear energy, or might that have something to do with Iran?
Hmmm.
Labels: Iranian nuclear threat, Israeli nuclear capability, our friends the Saudis, Turki al-Faisal
'Our friends the Saudis' threaten the United States
On the day after the tenth anniversary of 9/11, Turki al-Faisal, the former ambassador to the United States of the country that raised and nurtured
all but one of the 9/11 hijackers, is
threatening Saudi relations with the United States in the event that the US vetoes the unilateral declaration of a 'Palestinian state' in the UN Security Council.
The United States must support the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations this month or risk losing the little credibility it has in the Arab world. If it does not, American influence will decline further, Israeli security will be undermined and Iran will be empowered, increasing the chances of another war in the region.
Moreover, Saudi Arabia would no longer be able to cooperate with America in the same way it historically has. With most of the Arab world in upheaval, the “special relationship” between Saudi Arabia and the United States would increasingly be seen as toxic by the vast majority of Arabs and Muslims, who demand justice for the Palestinian people.
Saudi leaders would be forced by domestic and regional pressures to adopt a far more independent and assertive foreign policy. Like our recent military support for Bahrain’s monarchy, which America opposed, Saudi Arabia would pursue other policies at odds with those of the United States, including opposing the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in Iraq and refusing to open an embassy there despite American pressure to do so. The Saudi government might part ways with Washington in Afghanistan and Yemen as well.
How does this two-bit 8th century Kingdom, artificially created by the British 100 years ago, come off threatening the United States of America? Because Barack Hussein Obama is a 97-pound weakling.
Even Israeli officials have recently admitted privately to their European counterparts that only Saudi Arabia will be able to give the Palestinians the required religious, political and financial legitimacy they need to complete a deal with Israel.
But the Saudis failed to do that in 2000, when Yasser Arafat said he would not be the leader who would give away the Temple Mount. The Saudis failed to back him then. Why would anyone trust them to do so today?
Saudi Arabia had earmarked over $2.5 billion in aid to the Palestinian Authority since June 2009, making it by far the largest single supporter of the Palestinian cause. But this money will not do much good until Palestinians are granted their fundamental rights.
But most of that money has not reached the 'Palestinians' and it never will. The Saudis talk big, but carry a small stick.
Ten years ago next month, then New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani did the right thing by declining $10 million from al-Faisal's cousin,
Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal.
"I entirely reject that statement," Giuliani said. "There is no moral equivalent for this [terrorist] act. There is no justification for it. The people who did it lost any right to ask for justification for it when they slaughtered 4,000 or 5,000 innocent people."
Prince Alwaleed gave the mayor a check after a Thursday morning memorial service at Ground Zero, the site of the World Trade Center towers destroyed in the attacks.
The prince offered his condolences to the people of New York, but after the ceremony he released a statement suggesting the United States "must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack."
"The check has not been deposited. The Twin Towers Fund has not accepted it," Giuliani said in a statement late Thursday.
The prince's statement said the United States "should re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stand toward the Palestinian cause.
"While the U.N. passed clear resolutions numbered 242 and 338 calling for the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip decades ago, our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of Israelis while the world turns the other cheek," the statement said.
Giuliani flatly rejected the prince's position. "To suggest that there's a justification for [the terrorist attacks] only invites this happening in the future," he said. "It is highly irresponsible and very, very dangerous.
"And one of the reasons I think this happened is because people were engaged in moral equivalency in not understanding the difference between liberal democracies like the United States, like Israel, and terrorist states and those who condone terrorism.
"So I think not only are those statements wrong, they're part of the problem," Giuliani said.
Some things ought not to be for sale. American integrity is one of them.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Palestinian state RIGHT NOW syndrome, Turki al-Faisal, Unilateral declaration of independence (UDI)
'Charming' Saudi threatens US over Israel
And to think that Maureen Dowd of the
New York Times once referred to him as '
charming.' He's anything but charming in this
distortion-filled op-ed in the Washington Post.
As the main political and financial supporter of the Palestinian quest for self-determination, Saudi Arabia holds an especially strong position. The kingdom’s wealth, steady growth and stability have made it the bulwark of the Middle East. As the cradle of Islam, it is able to symbolically unite most Muslims worldwide. In September, the kingdom will use its considerable diplomatic might to support the Palestinians in their quest for international recognition. American leaders have long called Israel an “indispensable” ally. They will soon learn that there are other players in the region — not least the Arab street — who are as, if not more, “indispensable.” The game of favoritism toward Israel has not proven wise for Washington, and soon it will be shown to be an even greater folly.
Commentators have long speculated about the demise of Saudi Arabia as a regional powerhouse. They have been sorely disappointed. Similarly, history will prove wrong those who imagine that the future of Palestine will be determined by the United States and Israel. There will be disastrous consequences for U.S.-Saudi relations if the United States vetoes U.N. recognition of a Palestinian state. It would mark a nadir in the decades-long relationship as well as irrevocably damage the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and America’s reputation among Arab nations. The ideological distance between the Muslim world and the West in general would widen — and opportunities for friendship and cooperation between the two could vanish.
We Arabs used to say no to peace, and we got our comeuppance in 1967. In 2002 King Abdullah offered what has become the Arab Peace Initiative. Based on U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, it calls for an end to the conflict based on land for peace. The Israelis withdraw from all occupied lands, including East Jerusalem, reach a mutually agreed solution to the Palestinian refugees and recognize the Palestinian state. In return, they will get full diplomatic recognition from the Arab world and all the Muslim states, an end to hostilities and normal relations with all these states.
Now, it is the Israelis who are saying no. I’d hate to be around when they face their comeuppance.
This lecture about the 'human rights' of 'Palestinians' might not have been quite so annoying had the government that Tooki represents not arrested five women in Riyadh on Thursday...
for the crime of driving. That's not a crime for women in Israel - the only country in the Middle East that shares values with the United States. The only thing the Saudis share with the United States is oil. For now.
Labels: Palestinian state RIGHT NOW syndrome, Saudi Royal Family, Turki al-Faisal, unilateral declaration of statehood
