Bipartisan letter to Obama: Stop threatening Israel
Mar 31, 2015 22:54:25 GMT -5
Post by PurplePuppy on Mar 31, 2015 22:54:25 GMT -5
Bipartisan letter to Obama: Stop threatening Israel
By Jennifer Rubin March 30
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry leaves after a news conference in Ankara September 12, 2014. Kerry said on Friday he was comfortable that the United States would form a broad-based coalition to fight Islamic State militants but said it would not be appropriate for Iran to be involved in the efforts. REUTERS/Brendan Smialowski/Pool (TURKEY - Tags: POLITICS) Secretary of State John Kerry in September. (REUTERS/Brendan Smialowsk)
Right Turn has obtained a copy of a letter from Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.) to President Obama imploring him to recall that “Democratic and Republican administrations have stood by Israel in opposing anti-Israel or one-sided resolutions at the UN Security Council and other UN agencies.” They quote back to him his own words from 2011 declaring, “Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations.” In relatively strong language, the senators say he must remain firm against resolutions that circumvent direct negotiations and “must make clear our willingness to use our veto power to block such efforts at the UN Security Council and our continuing defense of Israel at the United Nations Human Rights Council and other agencies where Israel is under constant assault.”
It is extraordinary that such a letter is even necessary, but this president has gone into a realm of threats and recriminations no other president has ever attempted. This is no longer a conservative or Republican backlash. Liberal stalwarts in Congress and in the foreign policy community, many of whom harbor no affection for the current Israeli prime minister, are dumbstruck. David Rothkopf, publisher of the center-left Foreign Policy and a former Clinton official, writes: “Just because the Middle East’s descent into chaos is hardly the fault of the Obama administration, that doesn’t mean its policies in the region are not an egregious failure. . . . Now, as noted above, Benjamin Netanyahu is no walk in the park as a partner. But it is also undeniable that the White House has poured gasoline on the flames that have all but incinerated the traditional foundations of the relationship. Whatever the next 21 months may bring — and a further deterioration of the relationship is likely — it’s no exaggeration to say that the relationship between the leaders of the United States and Israel is at a historic low. In fact, you can say what you want about the origins of the current mess in the Middle East, but the fact that America’s relations with every important country in the region are worse with the exception of Iran is telling.”
Even the administration’s go-to journalist to launder its anonymous anti-Netanyahu barbs and provide sympathetic spin, Jeffrey Goldberg, is questioning much-publicized concessions, including the jaw-dropping collapse on Fordow. (“If the underground enrichment facility at Fordow—which had been hidden from Western view for several years, and which the U.S. and Europe have repeatedly said needs to be closed—is allowed to run centrifuges, even to spin germanium and other elements that cannot be used in the manufacture of nuclear weapons, then doubt could legitimately be sown about the strength of this deal.”)
Who, at the end of the day, will be pleased with Obama’s anti-Israel tact? Other than the far left, apologists for Iran and purveyors of straw men (it is this deal or war!), it is hard to think who will come to the administration’s defense. Surely the Europeans and the Untied Nations will applaud his Israel bashing and appeasement, but in America it puts the Democratic Party and foreign policy experts (who may have many differences but operate in goodwill) in a bind: Do they support this leap into the abyss or do they do more than write letters and express “worry”? The senators’ letter may be a sign many Democrats are not willing to go over the cliff, wrecking our decades-long alliances and cooperating with a radical Islamist regime’s march to nuclear breakout. They and their inevitable 2016 presidential nominee had better decide how to put the brakes on this or they will bear the stain of these decisions for years to come.
link
By Jennifer Rubin March 30
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry leaves after a news conference in Ankara September 12, 2014. Kerry said on Friday he was comfortable that the United States would form a broad-based coalition to fight Islamic State militants but said it would not be appropriate for Iran to be involved in the efforts. REUTERS/Brendan Smialowski/Pool (TURKEY - Tags: POLITICS) Secretary of State John Kerry in September. (REUTERS/Brendan Smialowsk)
Right Turn has obtained a copy of a letter from Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.) to President Obama imploring him to recall that “Democratic and Republican administrations have stood by Israel in opposing anti-Israel or one-sided resolutions at the UN Security Council and other UN agencies.” They quote back to him his own words from 2011 declaring, “Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations.” In relatively strong language, the senators say he must remain firm against resolutions that circumvent direct negotiations and “must make clear our willingness to use our veto power to block such efforts at the UN Security Council and our continuing defense of Israel at the United Nations Human Rights Council and other agencies where Israel is under constant assault.”
It is extraordinary that such a letter is even necessary, but this president has gone into a realm of threats and recriminations no other president has ever attempted. This is no longer a conservative or Republican backlash. Liberal stalwarts in Congress and in the foreign policy community, many of whom harbor no affection for the current Israeli prime minister, are dumbstruck. David Rothkopf, publisher of the center-left Foreign Policy and a former Clinton official, writes: “Just because the Middle East’s descent into chaos is hardly the fault of the Obama administration, that doesn’t mean its policies in the region are not an egregious failure. . . . Now, as noted above, Benjamin Netanyahu is no walk in the park as a partner. But it is also undeniable that the White House has poured gasoline on the flames that have all but incinerated the traditional foundations of the relationship. Whatever the next 21 months may bring — and a further deterioration of the relationship is likely — it’s no exaggeration to say that the relationship between the leaders of the United States and Israel is at a historic low. In fact, you can say what you want about the origins of the current mess in the Middle East, but the fact that America’s relations with every important country in the region are worse with the exception of Iran is telling.”
Even the administration’s go-to journalist to launder its anonymous anti-Netanyahu barbs and provide sympathetic spin, Jeffrey Goldberg, is questioning much-publicized concessions, including the jaw-dropping collapse on Fordow. (“If the underground enrichment facility at Fordow—which had been hidden from Western view for several years, and which the U.S. and Europe have repeatedly said needs to be closed—is allowed to run centrifuges, even to spin germanium and other elements that cannot be used in the manufacture of nuclear weapons, then doubt could legitimately be sown about the strength of this deal.”)
Who, at the end of the day, will be pleased with Obama’s anti-Israel tact? Other than the far left, apologists for Iran and purveyors of straw men (it is this deal or war!), it is hard to think who will come to the administration’s defense. Surely the Europeans and the Untied Nations will applaud his Israel bashing and appeasement, but in America it puts the Democratic Party and foreign policy experts (who may have many differences but operate in goodwill) in a bind: Do they support this leap into the abyss or do they do more than write letters and express “worry”? The senators’ letter may be a sign many Democrats are not willing to go over the cliff, wrecking our decades-long alliances and cooperating with a radical Islamist regime’s march to nuclear breakout. They and their inevitable 2016 presidential nominee had better decide how to put the brakes on this or they will bear the stain of these decisions for years to come.
link