Powered by WebAds

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Why Netanyahu is a winner in Massachusetts

I don't know whether Senator-elect Scott Brown (R-MA) and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu have ever met. A search of Google images didn't turn up any pictures of them together. While I hope they will meet, that doesn't have to happen for Prime Minister Netanyahu to reap the benefits of Tuesday's stunning election in Massachusetts. Haaretz's Aluf Benn is in a tizzy over the possibility that Netanyahu will be a big beneficiary of what happened yesterday. And he's right to be in a tizzy. Because it's good news for Israel that the Obama agenda - with a 'Palestinian state' as its foreign policy linchpin - went down to a resounding defeat on Tuesday.
Over the past nine months, Netanyahu has managed to curb pressure from Obama, who enjoys a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress. Now, however, Obama will be more dependent on the support of his Republican rivals, the supporters and friends of Netanyahu.

No Israeli politician matches his steps to the political goings-on in the U.S. as much as Netanyahu. He dragged out negotiations over the settlement freeze and then decided it would last for 10 months and end in September - just in time for U.S. Congressional elections in which Democrats are expected to suffer heavy losses.

Netanyahu understood he must withstand the pressure until his right-wing supporters recapture a position of power on Capitol Hill and work to rein in the White House's political activities. The election in Massachusetts, one of the most liberal states in America, will from this moment on be a burden for Obama.

Proponents of the peace process will view this as a missed opportunity for Obama, who spent his first year in office on fruitless diplomatic moves that failed to restart talks between Israel and the Palestinians. From now on, it will be harder for Obama. Congressional support is essential to the political process and in the current political atmosphere in the U.S. - in which the parties are especially polarized - Netanyahu can rely on Republican support to thwart pressure on Israel.
As Ronald Reagan would say, it's morning in America. And in Israel. Thank God.


At 7:40 PM, Blogger nomatter said...

George Bush was said to be the best friend of Israel.

I am not saying Brown will not help however we are so desperate for people on our side we get enveloped with false hope while in the mean time they end up screwing us.

The last thing we need are empty words or false hope. I care about backing up words with deeds. The fact even Republicans can be found to appease the Arab world in place of honor and doing the right thing toward Israel

Do you remember when Bush sold the Saudi's those fighter jets going against a promise to never sell them?

Does one not wonder if both houses were packed with Republicans and the president was Republican the world would expect less of Israel and more of the Palestinian people?

Bush promised on his first week of office he would sign the embassy act. Did he? (For that, things have gone from bad to worse where the current anti-Jew sits in office having the courage to deny Jerusalem is even the capital of Israel!) In the midst of the intifada Bush called for a Palestinian state and kicked off the U.S led quartet for peace made up of arch enemies of Israel. If nothing else sealed reward for terror for slaughtering Jews, this move did! Well I could go on and on with more examples of failed friends leaving us out to be eaten by the wolves but for what?

The reason the peace process fails lies in the hands of those who forgo truth, honesty and honor for appeasement. It fails because in essence we have few friends in power who are willing to honestly stand up and call the Arab/Muslim/Islamic world liars and that their main goal is wanting to wipe the State of Israel off the map.

Iran is giving the finger to the West because they can. Bush knew it, now Obama is exploiting it while the rest of the world gives a bloody damn Israel gets blown from the map.

My point, words mean squat. Even a sitting Republican president means squat. (basing this on passed performance from friends and foes alike)

At 8:16 PM, Blogger J. Lichty said...

Congress on both sides of the aisle is more pro-Israel than Obama by a long shot, and was certainly more attuned that even the right-hearted, but wrong headed George W Bush.

Congress controls the purse strings, but apart from that its overwhelming pro-Israel proclivities (the most pro-Israel body in the world including the Israeli government), is limited.

Much of the foreign policy that is conducted by the executive branch is doen at the direction of the State Department (see, e.g., Powell and Rice with their roadmap and annapolis processes respectively).

While individual members of Congress and Congress as a whole express more hawkish views, apart from aid and sanctions there is little that Congress can do to curb the agenda of the executive branch.

This vote will mean nothing directly in the scheme of things for a Congress that had already a far more than a majority in any pro-Israel legislation that comes before it.

Lest you think this will spur the Emperor of the World to change his policies toward Israel, I think that will not happen. At most, this was a referendum on Obama's domestic power grab in general, and health care in particular.

At 10:16 PM, Blogger bunuel said...

Thank God, indeed. Sky starting to open again. And, thank you for an excellent site.

At 4:07 PM, Blogger NormanF said...

Its really good news. Liberalism is the enemy of freedom and a strong America. If the West is to survive, America must not go the way of the Roman Empire.


Post a Comment

<< Home