Tag Archives: Arab

President Obama’s Disturbing New Assertion at AIPAC

On May 22, 2011, President Obama followed up his controversial May 19 speech on the Middle East and Palestinian/Israel conflict with an address to the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC).  Some political pundits assert that he backed down from previous assertions concerning Israel’s boundaries made in his May 19 speech on the Middle East. Though charming and  conciliatory in tone when speaking to the 10,000 pro-Israel AIPAC delegates, as I read his speech I cannot agree with those pundits. As far as I can see, he did not back down or change his central assertions that Israel must fully withdraw its military from Judea and Samaria and that Israel must agree to establishing its new borders along pre-1967 borders.

He states:

…no matter how hard it may be to start meaningful negotiations under the current circumstances, we must acknowledge that a failure to try is not an option. The status quo is unsustainable. That is why on Thursday, I stated publicly the principles that the United States believes can provide a foundation for negotiations toward an agreement to end the conflict …

That doesn’t sound like backing down to me. That sounds like a defense or justification for those assertions.

Obama’s Justifications Restated

He also restated three reasons/justifications (and added a fourth and very disturbing new justification) for his controversial  initiative and push for indefensible pre-1967 borders as a pre-condition for peace. He continues:

First, the number of Palestinians living west of the Jordan River is growing rapidly and fundamentally reshaping the demographic realities of both Israel and the Palestinian territories. This will make it harder and harder-without peace-to maintain Israel as both a Jewish state and a democratic state. Second, technology will make it harder for Israel to defend itself in the absence of a genuine peace. And third, a new generation of Arabs is reshaping the region. A just and lasting peace can no longer be forged with one or two Arab leaders. Going forward, millions of Arab citizens have to see that peace is possible for that peace to be sustained. 

However, it is his fourth and disturbing new  justification that really caught my attention.

In his words:

Just as the context has changed in the Middle East, so too has it been changing in the international community over the last several years. There is a reason why the Palestinians are pursuing their interests at the United Nations. They recognize that there is impatience with the peace process — or the absence of one. Not just in the Arab World, but in Latin America, in Europe, and in Asia. That impatience is growing, and is already manifesting itself in capitols around the world. …But the march to isolate Israel internationally — and the impulse of the Palestinians to abandon negotiations — will continue to gain momentum in the absence of a credible peace process and alternative. For us to have leverage with the Palestinians, with the Arab states, and with the international community, the basis for negotiations has to hold out the prospect of success. 

Translation: In other words, though the US is trying hard to stand with you, Israel, you now have to satisfy and negotiate with not only the Palestinians and bordering Arab states but also an alienated and pro-Palestinian “international community”. Israel — can’t you see? The whole world is against you. The Palestinians are unilaterally angling to obtain official statehood status at the UN. They will get it. That would be a disaster for you. I’m just trying to head off that catastrophe. Your only chance is to follow my strategy whether you like it or not.  Help me help you!

I believe the President is also inferring that he can’t hold off Arab and international aspirations forever. Though he professes his support of Israel his support was very uncertain in the Gaza Flotilla incident last May. Only at the last second did he veto an extremely anti-Israel resolution by the UN Security Council.

All of this to say that President Obama’s intentions towards Israel , at the very least,  remain very uncertain and unclear.

Remember!

Watch very closely what a leader does–not what he says–to know his true intentions.  

God’s promise to Israel in the latter days:

If anyone stirs up strife, it is not from me; whoever stirs up strife with you shall fall because of you. (Isaiah 54: 14)

Joel Chernoff

Do I Hear the Voice of Truth in Zion?

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman

What a breath of fresh air! Finally…a clear voice for truth on behalf of Israel. My respect for the new government of Israel is growing every day. While the people of Israel know the newly appointed Israeli Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, most of us outside of Israel don’t know much about him.

What I do know is that the world community sees him more as an ultra-nationalist and extreme anti-Arab right winger. However, I was quite amazed at today’s news report on his recent interview with the Jerusalem Post.

I think I am becoming a new fan of FM Lieberman

While  SS Hilary Clinton from the Obama administration is busy warning Israel about this and that and telling Israel what they need to do to be successful in Obama’s new world, Lieberman is sending a marvelously clear and sensible counter message to President Obama and the international community…one I don’t believe they will like.

Here is a simple digest of a few of the truthful, clear and politically incorrect statements he has recently made.

Driving the International Secular/Liberal Elite Crazy

  • “The international community has to stop speaking in slogans if it really wants to help the new Israeli government work towards a solution to the Palestinian conflict and help bring stability to the Middle East. Slogans like land for peace and two-state solution are both over-simplistic and ignore the root causes of the ongoing conflict.”
  • This one I really love. It shows me he understands the true nature of the Middle East conflict: “The real reason for the deadlock with the Palestinians is not occupation, not settlements and not settlers. This conflict is really a very deep conflict…Today it’s more a religious conflict.”
  • The path forward lays in insuring security for Israel, an improved economy for the Palestinians and stability for both.
  • Concerning the right of return of Palestinian refugees from earlier wars…”It cannot be on the table. I’m not ready to even discuss the right of return of even one refugee.”
  • Though he made clear that a precondition for progress in the peace process is not based on Palestinian recognition of Israel he does state, “But somebody who really wants a solution, somebody who really desires a real peace and a real agreement, must realize that this would be impossible to achieve without recognizing Israel as a Jewish state.”

That’s right Mr. Lieberman…

islam …the bottom line is that this conflict is religious or spiritual at its root. It’s a confrontation between the God of Israel and the God of Islam. That’s why the conflict has zero chance of being resolved by political means.

Lieberman is nicely but clearly suggesting to the world that they have it all wrong because they do not know or care what the true basis of the conflict is.

Though Lieberman seems to understand the religious nature of the conflict…

… I wonder whether he, himself, understands that the resolution is rooted in a fundamental spiritual change within Israel’s Moslem Arab neighbors.

In any case Lieberman indicates that the new Israeli government will complete its own foreign policy review over the next two weeks and then make it public when President Obama and PM Netanyahu meets in Washington May 18.

Netanyahu & Obama

Netanyahu & Obama

Let us pray that our President does not pressure Israel to do things that can only hurt her security and that PM Netanyahu along with FM Lieberman have the fortitude to stand up to the most powerful man and country on planet earth.

Joel Chernoff

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