Doc's Talk: Op-Ed: Israel and Obama's Perilous Shift in Foreign Policy

Sunday, April 08, 2012

Op-Ed: Israel and Obama's Perilous Shift in Foreign Policy

Obama totally unmasked himself with his remarks to Medvedev and his body language speaks volumes about his real sympathies.

Dr. Joe Tuzara
Born in Manila, American by choice, the author is a former clinical research-physician-general surgeon for Saudi Arabian, Philippine and American healthcare systems and currently an American freelance writer as well as op-ed contributor to Yahoo Network and Israel National News.

At the tail end of his 90 minute meeting with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev in Seoul last week, Obama said that he would have "more flexibility" to deal with controversial issues such as missile defense, but incoming Russian President Vladimir Putin needs to give him "space, "ABC News reports.

Unbeknownst to the two leaders, the private conversation made public by a live microphone provide a clear pattern of Obama's mindset and glimpse into his future far-left approach to foreign policy in the second term he expects to win. The implication is far-reaching, since he can do whatever he wants and he no longer feels accountable to America's voting public.

And to everyone's surprise, why in the world should the US, with an unmatched strategic advantage in missile defense, yield to Russia just to placate Vladimir Putin? And what foreign policy interests is Obama willing to trade for that 'space' so that he can win a second term?

Obama totally unmasked himself with his remarks to Medvedev and his body language speaks volumes about his real sympathies. And that is no joking matter when he showed little regard for our national security.

Barring a surprise Israeli attack on Iran nuclear program, it's hard to imagine that foreign policy will play heavily in an election year. However, expect the American electorate to think twice about giving Obama a second term because of his 'flexibility' of caving on missile defenses.

In a broader sense, Obama's 'flexibility' and politically driven timetable makes no strategic sense to unilaterally disarm America. Hoping that our adversaries will respond in kind is dangerously naïve and completely illogical.

Unprecedented Betrayal and Appeasement

The abrupt cancellation of a Polish- and Czech-based US missile defense system in 2009, deeply undercut two very pro-American allies who had agreed to host in defiance of Russian threats.

This major concession, together with a New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty far more needed by Russia than America, was supposed to ease US-Russia relations, assuage Russian opposition to missile defense and enlist its assistance in stopping Iran's nuclear program, the Washington Post reports.

In a strange display of appeasement, US government officials confirmed to Reuters this week that the Obama White House want to share top-secret intelligence on US missile-defense systems with Russia.

Obama's underhanded overture expressing more faith in Russia at the expense of America and our traditional allies is mind boggling. Indeed, Obama's pursuit of nuclear abolition fantasies to weaken our missile defense systems is a weird recapitulation of American weakness.

In an article written for Foreign Policy magazine, 'Israel's Secret Staging Ground" disclosed that Israel is secretly staging an airstrike on Iran in neighboring Azerbaijan- which would make an Israeli attack on Iran easier.

The Obama administration want to make the plans public to disrupt any secret agreements between Israel and Azerbaijan that would leave the US in the dark, according to Moscow's RT News.

Former US Ambassador John Bolton called the alleged leak "just unprecedented to reveal this kind of information about one of your own allies."

When asked by The Daily Caller, renowned Middle East expert Barry Rubin scoffs at Obama's foreign policy and replied that Israelis does not believe Obama has their back in the face of the Iranian nuclear threat as he recently publicly proclaimed.

Why is this happening?

It is an open secret that George Soros, wealthy anti-Israel Hungarian-American Jew is financing Obama's policies through Media Matters, according to Huffington Post. So it is not surprising that the presence of the left-leaning media watchdog in White House to counter Fox News and Obama's enemies remain suspect for the coordinated leak.

And why would the 'Jewish support for Obama strong despite Israel stance'?, according to Washington Post.

Since Obama took office, a series of verbal mishaps have led to a dreadful question: 'Is Obama a Muslim, Communist or a closet anti-Semite?' 'If not, why is Obama undermining America and its allies?'

Faced with the inconvenient realities, Obama's socialist policies and Islamic upbringing he vehemently denies are all evidence to the contrary. To which former House Speaker and Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich says 'Obama gives people reason to believe he's Muslim', the Washington Post reported.

Diplomatic Faux Pas Nobody Can Deny

In an unprecedented act of absurdity, Obama was criticised for 'bowing' to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and broke royal protocol by speaking over the national anthem during the Queen's banquet at Buckingham Palace, The Telegraph reported.

On Iran, Obama began his presidency profusely apologizing for the US role in 1953 coup d'état and called for a diplomatic engagement policy without pre-conditions and failed miserably.

Consistently from day one, Obama pressured and bullied Israel over settlements. After his major foreign policy speech last year Obama unilaterally endorsed a Palestinian state based on pre-1967 borders, which proved detrimental to the comatose peace process.

In an utter lack of statesmanship, never in American history has a foreign head of state been treated so rudely at an intense meeting at the White House. Obama even refused to have his picture taken at all with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

To top it all, Obama's lack of regards for other stems from his extreme 'Narcissism of Big Differences', according to the Wall Street Journal.

Last February Gingrich told CBS News that Obama is running a feckless foreign policy of appeasement that endangers the nation's security is "the most dangerous president in modern American history," And defeating that president is "a duty of national security."

Perhaps, it is about time to demand that all presidential candidates submit to mandatory rigorous mental health evaluation with the results to be made public as part of the vetting process. Only then can we declare earnestly at least, that never again another narcissistic and 'dangerous' president whose legacy is a massive post-traumatic stress disorder for America and its allies get inadvertently elected.

Abraham Lincoln famously said 'You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.'

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk