There is estimation in the Obama
Administration that, if a Herzog/Livni government is formed in Israel, it will
dance to Obama’s tune. But if Bibi retains control, the entire Obama Middle
East policy is in ruins.
Recalling John Kerry’s threat
that if Israel doesn't surrender Jerusalem, Judea & Samaria to a Jew-free
PLO/Hamas state Israel will be seen as an apartheid state. This wouldn't happen
if there is a change of government in Israel.
Martin Indyk of the
Qatar-sponsored Brookings Institute threatened, at the INSS Annual Conference
in Tel Aviv, that if Bibi stays in
office the US would help pass a resolution “against Israel’s will” in
the United Nations Security Council that will “lay out the principles of a
two-state solution.”
Indyk said Israel could avoid
this fate if the Herzog/Livni camp wins the elections. In other words, a two-state
solution without punishing Israel. In
other words, heads you lose, tails you lose, if you are Israel.
Indyk also said that Israel
should have no concerns over an Iranian nuclear deal. Giving away the promise
that Iran would never become a nuclear breakout state under the protection of
an Obama Administration, he said at the INSS event that the US would protect
Israel should Iran reach that nuclear capability. Which poses the question,
which is it? No they won’t because Obama and Kerry have guaranteed it, or yes
they will despite the agreement?
We should recall that the US has failed
to detect every global nuclear breakout in history – India, Pakistan and North
Korea. They have also failed to keep pace with Iran’s ongoing nuclear program,
and it was Israel that had to deal with the Iraqi and Syrian nuclear
facilities. Therefore, it would be mad, and dangerous, for Israel to put its
faith in a US ability to stop an Iranian breakout in time.
Obama delinks terrorism and
radical Islam. In fact, he doesn’t recognize radical Islam. Therefore, would he
dare claim that the terror-sponsoring Islamic Republic of Iran that maintains
Hezbollah and Syria’s Assad, supports Hamas, has usurped Yemen with its Houthi
proxy, and devoutly believes in a world-destruction to herald the coming of the
Shiite Messiah is a regime “that perverts Islam?”
Obama is incredulously working
toward introducing Iran as a regional strategic ally in the war against Islamic
State (although you will never hear Obama or Kerry call this terror army by
that name). To that end, the plan is in place to have Iran provide Shiite ground
forces to drive ISIS out of Anbar Province in north western Iraq while the US
will supply covering air strikes.
With a wink and a nod, Obama will
not intervene when Iran retains Shia control over this area. This will allow
Iran a strategic geopolitical corridor leading from their country through Iraq
into Syria and give them access to the Mediterranean Sea.
The Iranian nuclear deal is being seen in the Muslim world as if Obama is giving legitimacy to the Shia bloc of Islam.
The Iranian nuclear deal is being seen in the Muslim world as if Obama is giving legitimacy to the Shia bloc of Islam.
With Iran now controlling Yemen
they have a choke-hold over shipping entering or exiting the Red Sea. This is a
strategic danger to Israel, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
This raises the question, which
side of Islam is Obama really on? The moderates or the radicals?
There has been a strange display
of shifting loyalties by Obama as illustrated by the following moves. Obama
showed his petulance after General al-Sisi replaced the unpopular Muslim
Brotherhood leadership in Egypt. He put a clamp on arms supply to an Egypt that
is battling against multiple terror fronts, namely the Muslim Brotherhood and
its affiliate, Hamas, in Gaza, Al-Qaida in the Sinai and Islamic State both in
the Sinai and across Egypt’s border in Libya. When Egypt accused Qatar of
supporting terrorism, Qatar withdrew its ambassador from Cairo. This was
quickly followed by a visit to the White House by the Emir of Qatar for close
talks with President Obama.
Obama claims that America is to
blame for advancing “the forces of extremism.” With his promotion of
Iranian interests the US President is doing precisely that.
It is in this light that he sees
Benjamin Netanyahu’s timely address to Congress as a frontal assault on his
Middle East policies.
Netanyahu’s words to Congress will
deal with three of the world’s most significant problems;
The true nature of Iran and the
fault lines of a bad nuclear deal that will wipe away the image that Obama and
Kerry are trying to project.
The truth about the spread of
radical Islamic terrorism, including the Iranian version.
Why the creation of a Palestinian
state at this time will not bring peace given the true face of the Palestinian
leadership.
Obama is concerned that Israel’s
Prime Minister will eloquently spell out the reality of the Middle East in words that
have not been heard emanating from the White House or the State Department.
This is why an Obama
Administration disinformation campaign is trying to punish Bibi and Israel.
Barry Shaw is the author of
the book ‘Israel Reclaiming the Narrative.’
www.israelnarrative.com Available
on Amazon.
No comments:
Post a Comment