U.S. vs Israel – Colliding Agendas

Thoughts on President Obama’s UN Speech

“First, we must stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and seek the goal of a world without them.”

These are the words defining President Obama’s agenda concerning nuclear weapons not just for the US but also the world. He goes on to say that he believes that all nations should have the right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy but not to use  nuclear weapons.

True to his globalist ideology, he also asserts that the UN and its nuclear agency the IAEA, should have more authority and that all nations should have to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and be forced to live up to it.

He says,

“All of this must support efforts to strengthen the NPT. Those nations that refuse to live up to their obligations must face consequences. This is not about singling out nations – it is about standing up for the rights of all nations that do live up to their responsibilities. Because a world in which the IAEA inspections are avoided and the United Nations’ demands are ignored will leave all people less safe, and all nations less secure…The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that treaties will be enforced.”

Sounds good…but isn’t the US being hypocritical?

In all fairness how can the US insist on non-proliferation and elimination of nuclear weapons when the US has more nukes than any other nation. President Obama knows this, so he is determined  to lead by example and reduce our nuclear capabilities, unilaterally if necessary, to demonstrate his sincerity. In other words he will try to convince the world that he/the US means business and that Russia, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, India etc. should do the same.

Why this is dangerous for Israel?

Our Arab/Moslem brothers know that these are not  empty words and have seized on a new strategy to weaken Israel. They have begun to confront Obama with an argument that goes like this,

We will stop the pursuit of nuclear weapons on the condition that Israel is forced to reveal the true extent of her nuclear arsenal, destroy her nuclear weapons, join the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and agree to  IAEA inspections.

If they can pursuade the US President to accomplish Israel’s nuclear disarmament then they would have succeeded in weakening the Jewish state to such an extent as to make Israel a very tempting target for an all out conventional war where the numbers are clearly in the Arab nations favor.

If they can’t achieve this then at least they can force a confrontation with the US and hopefully damage Israel’s relationship with the US thus further isolating Israel within the world community.

To the surrounding Arab/Moslem  nations, Israel’s nuclear weapons arsenal acts as a serious deterrent. They know that Israel could very possibly  destroy them if she felt that her national sovereignty was threatened.

What if Israel were to say no to President Obama’s strategy?

Already President Obama has pressured Israel in this direction and Israel has resisted him as nicely as possible.  If Israel rejects Obama’s instruction to comply with his nuclear weapons agenda (which he thinks is in Israel’s and the world’s best interest) he could begin pressuring Israel by cutting military aid and/or not vetoing anti-Israel UN resolutions amongst other measures.

In others words President Obama may see Israel as an obstacle to peace. If he could only get Israel to comply with his nuclear agenda, the Arab/Moslem world would then feel more safe and be forced to acknowledge that his path to peace is the one to take.

Surely Israel can understand this…he thinks.

And if they can’t, then the US will just have to assume the role of “tough love” administrator and force Israel to do what the President knows is best for her, the Arabs, the US, the world… and himself.

What does Israel understand?

Israel understands that she lives in a sea of hostile Arab and Moslem nations who have a stated goal of destroying this tiny Jewish state.

What Israel understands is that she wants to survive and giving up her nuclear weapons in the current hostile environment is inviting a national disaster.

What Israel understands is that she cannot – must not – give in to US pressure on this matter.

The next blog will take a look at what he had to say in his UN speech to the world about the Palestinian/Israel crisis.

Joel Chernoff

Part IV: Obama’s Stunning Turnaround on Iranian Nuclear Threat

After the September 11 Moslem terrorist attacks on the US, President George W. Bush, as well as the rest of the world, came to the logical conclusion that the radical Moslem terrorists and their state sponsors must be prevented access to nuclear weapons. We all know that if the terrorists have them they will use them against the US and the west in general. That is essentially a significant reason the US attacked Iraq and why President George W. Bush threatened military action against Iran during his Presidency.

Iranian Threat

Iran has been one of, if not the leading, state sponsor of Muslim terrorism. The whole world knows this and has explored every peaceful means to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons…to no avail. Iranian President Ahmadinejad has made it very clear that Iran will develop nuclear weapons and has threatened to use them against Israel in particular and the US through its links to terrorist group it is sponsoring or associated with.

Obama’s new US policy

Obama appears to ignore the previous assessments of US Presidents, the European Union (EU) and even the UN. It is important to understand how Obama views himself and the world on this issue.

In Cairo he revealed his long term view on nuclear arms and how he would apply his approach in the short term to the Middle East conflict. In his own words:

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with it’s responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

Summary of President Obama’s Philosophy on Nuclear Energy

• He believes in a nuclear bomb free world.
• He believes that all nations should have the right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
• He believes that all nations that desire nuclear energy must sign on to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and abide by its peaceful objectives. 

Obama’s Nuclear Strategy for the Middle East

• He knows the Arabs/Iranians will not sign the NPT unless Israel signs it, and eliminates its nuclear weapons. This is the reason he is pressuring Israel to do so. By the way, if Israel complied it would be a strategic coup for the enemies of Israel. A nuclear weapons free Israel would be a much more tempting target and easier enemy to defeat.
• By pressuring Israel he believes it gives him the moral authority to do the same with Iran.
• He is willing to trust Iran with nuclear power for energy purposes if they will sign the NPT and “promise” the world they will be “good boys and girls”.

Is Obama really that naive or stupid?

• Doesn’t he realize that Israel is surrounded by 250 million Muslim Arabs dedicated to the destruction of the State of Israel?
• Doesn’t he understand that there are another billion Moslem’s- yes even so called moderate Moslems – around the world that also support that objective?
• Doesn’t he understand that for the Moslem world the baseline issue is theological/spiritual not political and Israel’s existence is an affront to the Moslem world on religious grounds

The answer…

President Obama is very smart and has many brilliant advisors. I believe he understands the situation but has come to the conclusion that he is ready to gamble with or change America’s relationship with Israel (in my opinion for the worse) in order to achieve his objectives towards solving the Middle East conflict and reaching detente with Iran and the Arabs. I believe that Obama believes that if he can just get into the same room with these Moslem hard-liners that he has the personal charm and skills to change their minds and impose his will.

Of course Israel will not agree to disarm its nuclear weapons and neither will Iran agree to discontinue its drive towards developing nuclear weapons.

How far will Obama go with Israel? No one knows. Stay tuned.

Joel Chernoff

~The views contained in The Joel Chernoff Report are not necessarily views held by the MJAA~

Analysis: Obama’s Cairo Speech – Part 2

Part 2: Obama’s Position on Palestinian/Israel Conflict

President Obama begins this important part of his speech by comparing Israel’s birth out of the ashes of the Holocaust to the Palestinian peoples suffering and pursuit of a homeland.

President Obama says:

…it is undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslim and Christian – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the west bank, Gaza and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead.

Analysis:

• First of all the ”Palestinian people” have not been in pursuit of a homeland for 60 years. The Arab people that inhabited what is now Israel (and some still do live in Israel) were part of the Kingdom of Jordan. In other words they were Jordanian citizens and not pursuing a homeland. Jordan’s armies attacked Israel and were defeated in the 1948 War of Independence and again in the Six Day War of 1967. The Arab nations (Jordan included) tried to destroy Israel and were soundly defeated in both wars. That situation can in no way be compared to the incredible genocide committed against Jewish people in World War II. It was simply Arab aggression that has caused the current Palestinian suffering and displacement.
• Obama, also, seems to legitimize the Palestinian refugee’s status by saying that they have waited in refugee camps for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. The Arabs waiting in refugee camps are there because their host Arab nations have chosen NOT to absorb them as Israel absorbed hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees from Arab nations after the Arabs lost the War of Independence. It is the host Arab nations who have perpetuated the suffering of the Arab/Palestinian refugees.

Obama continues with these choice words:

They endure the daily humiliations – large and small – that come with occupation.

 

Analysis:

• The humiliations, as Obama describes them, are a direct result of thousands of Arab/Palestinian bombs and terror attacks that force the Israeli government to spend untold millions to defend its borders and citizens against attack. Obama infers that this is somehow Israel’s fault and that they are being cruel taskmasters to the Palestinians when this is far from the truth.
• He also characterizes Israel’s presence as occupation. This really annoys me. The rules of war are timeless and well known. If you wage a war of conquest you risk defeat and losing control of some or all of your own land and sovereignty. The spoils to the victor are great but the risk to the losers is absolute. When it comes to Israel, the rules of war do not seem to apply. Israel is the only country historically I know that when attacked, and is successful in repelling the aggressor and possessing some of the aggressors lands, is then told by the world that it must give back the land it has claimed as a spoil of war. Israel won the war. Israel has no obligation to do anything and should be commended for its graciousness as the victor. Certainly the US army, in displacing the Native Indianpeoples of North America, has felt zero obligation to restore America’s sovereignty to the Indian nations. The US has grudgingly handed over some miniscule lands but the Indians ultimately live under the watchful eyes of the US government. So much for consistency. Israel was and continues to be the victim of Arab aggression.

It gets worse. Obama continues with these words:

So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable.

 

Analysis: What is troubling with this statement is that it follows his assertion that Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria is occupation. This leaves the listener feeling that Israel is to blame for the intolerable suffering of the Palestinian people.

Obama continues…

America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity and a state of their own.

Analysis: It feels to the listener that Obama is blaming Israel, however subtly, for denying Palestinians a state which is properly their right. He is also, with these words, positioning himself on the world stage as a Prince Valiant, who will personally act to right this grave injustice. This is very dangerous politically. It puts Israel into the extremely uncomfortable and unfair position of hurting Obama’s international prestige if Israel disagrees with his approach to resolving the conflict. The onus should be on the aggressors…the Arabs. Instead Obama has subtly shifted the blame to Israel.

More from Obama…

Obama scolds the Palestinians and in particular Hamas and says:

Palestinians must abandon violence…Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Analysis: First of all, some of these requisites are non-starters for the Arabs. What if they refuse to budge on these issues? Is Obama saying Israel is off the hook? I don’t think so. He has already shifted the blame to Israel so the responsibility to do something concrete is on Israel not the Arabs.

That is why he follows his scolding of the Palestinians with a much more concrete and harsh assertion for Israel. He says:

The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

He continues by requiring Israel to open its borders to Palestinian workers from Gaza and then West Bank.

…the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel’s security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

Analysis:

• I find it extremely arrogant for Obama to tell Israel that closing its borders (and for that matter building a security fence) to ward off potential terrorist acts is “against its security interest”. The last thing Israel wants to do is spend millions building security fences and closing their borders to the cheap and vital labor pool from Gaza and the West Bank. There is only one reason Israel does this…SELF DEFENSE.
• Also…Why is the onus on Israel?. My Arab cousins are the aggressors. He should be asserting that the Arabs must honor past agreements and cease their terror attacks immediately. Peace cannot move forward and Israel cannot be expected to make peace until the violence stops. He makes no such clear assertion of that truth but continues to push Israel. Why? Because he knows that the Arabs are stubborn and notorious for giving up nothing in negotiations…only Israel is willing to take steps towards peace. If he is to get the peace process going his best chance is to pressure little Israel to make indeed another concession. This is a grave injustice.

Lastly and importantly, Obama says the following:

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace.

Analysis: We will soon see if his actions match his rhetoric. If Israel will not be intimidated by the President and publicly refuses to enact measures that Obama requires that will jeopardize its security and survival, what measures will Obama take to force or coerce Israel into seeing things his way? I hope none. I believe the opposite.

Conclusion

What bothers me the most is President Obama’s very public shifting of blame for the Arab/Israeli conflict to Israel. I hope I am wrong about Obama but I believe his true heart and sympathies are revealed in his carefully chosen words in Cairo.

Part III will look at His change of position concerning Iran and its nuclear program.

Joel Chernoff

~The views contained in The Joel Chernoff Report are not necessarily views held by the MJAA~

No Political Solution to Mideast Conflict?

 Israel has a new government and a new Prime Minister…Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu successfully pieced together a government and now has the responsibility for navigating treacherous national and international political and military issues confronting Israel.

Israel's newly appointed Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu

Mr. Netanyahu appears to be up to the task.

He wasted no time in sending the world a message that he sees the Iranian nuclear threat as the number one issue facing not only Israel’s existence but also endangering the western world.

Amazingly, even before he was sworn into office, he publically stated that if the US does not put an end to the Iranian nuclear threat “Israel might be forced to resort to a military strike on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear installations.” (Jerusalem Post) Now that’s a bold statement given the post Gaza/anti-Israel political climate internationally.

 An Apocalyptic cult?

He further stated,

“You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs…When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying, and that is what is happening in Iran.”

Netanyahu goes on to point out Iranian President Ahmadinajad’s multiple calls to “wipe Israel off the map” and politically influential Iranian Moslem cleric Ayatollah Khamenei’s description of Israel as “a cancerous tumor.” He appears to take the Iranian President and cleric at their word. I really believe Netanyahu’s warning concerning Iran is serious. Israel will follow through.

I don’t believe he is spouting empty words…and for that matter neither is the God of Israel.

I love it when the enemies of Israel so brazenly shake their fist in Israel’s face. What they don’t realize is that they are actually mocking the God of Israel and that is not a wise thing to do. Israel exists in her homeland because God brought about their return for His purposes and plans. Any person or nation that gets in the way of God’s agenda will find themselves at the “sharp end of His divine sword.”

This is a spiritual not political confrontation.

Look–the fact is that our Arab cousins and Moslem brothers see this as a spiritual confrontation between the God of Islam and the God of Israel. They couldn’t be anymore clear about it. Messianic Jews and most evangelical Christians agree with this perspective. Western politicians and leaders seem not to grasp this so they pursue a political answer only to encounter failure year after year. They ignore the obvious at their own peril. Let me say this very clearly…

Their will be no political resolution of the Middle East conflict.

It will be resolved but not in the way the world thinks it should be. God does have a plan and we have very good Biblical evidence as to what it might be. More on that in later blogs.

Is a confrontation between President Obama and PM Netanyahu in the works?

If PM Netanyahu carries out his threat and attacks Iran unilaterally it will certainly put their relationship to the test. Of course Netanyahu does not want to offend or lose America’s friendship but I really believe that he will act in Israel’s best interest first and worry about what the rest of the world thinks later.

Obama on the other hand fancies himself to be globalist and is right now positioning himself via the opportunities presented by the international financial crisis as a possible leader of some form of one world government. (more on this later)

He is a globalist rather than a nationalist. John McCain was clearly a “country first” (nationalist) candidate while President Obama presented himself as something more. Time will tell.

We need to continue to pray…

that the USA continues to stay on the right side of this prophetic scenario and support Israel unwaveringly. This protects us from God’s judgment for our countries mounting debt of moral depravity among many other sins. Blessing Israel will continue to stay God’s wrath. His mercy and blessing instead will continue to be released over us. (Genesis 12:3)

Joel Chernoff

 ~The views contained in The Joel Chernoff Report are not necessarily views held by the MJAA~