UN Ambassador Susan Rice used an interview with former Democrat operative George Stephanopoulos as a vehicle to bash GOP candidates Governors Mitt Romney and Rick Perry for their criticism of the Obama Administration's policies on Israel, and inadvertently revealed a lot about the Obama Administration's mindset:
Saying the Republicans were “playing politics” with international issues, Susan Rice responded to Mitt Romney, who called the President’s handling of Palestinian statehood an “unmitigated diplomatic disaster,” and Rick Perry, who suggested the U.S. should cut off funding for the Palestinian Authority if it continues to pursue a UN vote on statehood.
“I think Governor Perry ought to really consider the real world implications of that for Israel. Because the security assistance that the United States provides the Palestinian Authority benefits Israel directly and Israelis are well aware of that,” Rice said.
“But the reality is George, from his second day in office President Obama has been committed to bringing the Palestinian and Israelis to a final agreement so that there is an independent Palestinian state living side by side with the Jewish state of Israel,” she told me. “He’s done so and will continue to do so first and foremost because it is in our national interest to do so, it’s the right thing also for Israel and for the Palestinians.”
“So for those who want to play politics they’ll play politics. But the reality is Israel has had no better partner than this administration,” Rice said.
When one looks back at the Obama Administration's actual record on Israel,the earlier unilateral trashing of the agreement under which Israel signed on to the Road Map, its six month de facto arms embargo on Israel, Obama's demands that Israel forbear seeking to protect it's religious shrines as part of its heritage, his demands on Jerusalem, his open courting of the Muslim world and President Obama's treatment of Israeli PM Netanyahu not once but twice, her statement that Israel has no better partner than the Obama Administration is laughable, and even more disgraceful is that Stephanopoulos allowed her to make that statement without challenging it.
Also fascinating is her claim that the Israelis need the US to fund 'Palestine' for Israel's security. If the Israelis depended on the 'Palestinian' forces for their security, there would simply be a lot more dead Israeli civilians...and the fact is that the 'Palestinians' have never put a single person in jail for killing Jews. The 'Palestinian' security exists to protect Mahmoud Abbas and his corrupt apparatchiks and enforce their unelected rule, provide minimal police services and provide jobs paid for by donor aid. And yes, to provide the armed framework for a future War Against the Jews, just like it did for Arafat.
Quite revealing also is that Ambassador Rice refers to ” an independent Palestinian state living side by side with the Jewish state of Israel” when Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinians refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state..primarily because there’s no pressure by gullible western donors like the Obama Administration for them to do so!
Instead, the pressure is almost completely on Israel for more and more strategic concessions in exchange for zilch, because that’s the mindset and bias people like Rice, President Obama, Susan Power and others in the administration have.
It’s this attitude which enabled Palestinian intransigence and refusal to make any concessions. After all…why should Abbas be less ‘pro-Palestinian‘ than President Obama?
If the president really wanted to end this nonsense at the UN, which abrogates two treaties (Oslo and the Road Map) the Palestinian Authority as well as the US signed on to , he could do what George HW Bush did when Arafat tried this back in1989, threaten to cut off UN funds if they proceeded. But that's not President Obama's Agenda.
Perry and Romney are entirely correct. It’s amateur hour at this White House, fueled by ideology.
please donate...it helps me write more gooder!
4 comments:
Yes, the United States should stop supporting the Palestinian "State," and so should Israel. Cut off their electricity, block deliveries of food and other necessities. Let them die like rats in a trap.
Apologies to the rats; rats act according to their nature; men are supposed to be morally responsible for their actions.
I think the best thing Israel could do would be to declare Oslo and the Road Map null and void, annex all of Area A and most of Area B and put them under Israeli civilian rule rather than under military law and Ehud Barak and cut off the tax refunds to the PA from customs duties and VAT. A nice touch would be to use these funds for aid and rehabilitation of victims of 'Palestinian' terrorism.healthy duties paid to Israel for any good coming in to 'Palestine' from Israeli ports would also be a plus.
As for electricity, water and other utilities, no reason to cut them off, at least not to the PA.Simply charge them a good rate with no credit allowed, just like any other country would do.
Needless to say, let them know that any violence or terrorism directed by their citizens against Israel would be considered an act of war and that Israel will treat it accordingly.
They want a state, here's their opportunity. I doubt it will last long.
With the world's financial condition what it is and Obama out of office in little more than a year, I doubt there are going to be many donors who can afford to carry a basket case like 'Palestine' for very long.
Bibi's idea was to improve the 'Palestinian' standard of living to make them more amenable to peace. It would have worked lots of places, but not with the 'Palestinians'.
Regards,
Rob
Today's situation and the situatin faced by President George H.W. Bush in the late 1980s are not the sane as now. As such, the two situations are mot comparable. I've already pointed out in a previous reply on another thread why a cut back in UN funding by the United States will not work. Apparently it was missed. I will try again.
For starters, America is much less powerful relatively speaking today than it was in 1989. Also, the UN has other options for funding that likely were not available 22 years ago. If America went through with trying to cut funding to the UN today, there would be a push back agaisnt America by removing from various international bodies where it has representation where it has the ability to represent its interests. There would probably be crippling economic sanctions against America and there might even be a move to get America expelled from its permanent position on the UN Security Council.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, if we really want the kind of solution that Ms. Rice and others claim to want, the best approach would be to cut off all aid to the Palestinians or at least make it conditional much like the aid Israel receives. As long as the Palestinians are receiving these vast quantities of de facto uncondtional aid, they are going to have little incentive to negotiate in good faith. Cut this aid off and the parties are on more equal footing. In this situation the Palis may be mroe willing to negotiate in good faith.
If there's a silver lining in all of this, the general world economic situation likely means there will be less aid available for the Palis in the coming months. As such, their position relative to Israel will be more equal than it currently is. We may just end up with kind of negotiated settlement all the talking heads claim they want!!
Israel and America should just pull out of the UN. We should throw the UN out of NY. Let them go to Djibouti, or Bourkina Faso. See how much fun it is for the diplomats. No nice restaurants or titty bars for the devout, Jew -hating Muslims to frequent secretly on the tabs of their banana & cocoa republics. Economic sanctions against the US? Ha! Bring it on. OK we won't buy your crap. Sell it to who? Greece? Bwahahahahahahaha!
Post a Comment