Obama: Whose Back Has He Got? Israel’s Or Hamas’?

By Mort Klein and Daniel Mandel,  ALGEMEINER

Has President Barack Obama ‘got Israel’s back’? When policy is compared to rhetoric, the answer is no. Thus, when Hamas, a terrorist organization which calls in its Charter for the worldwide murder of Jews, launched a new round of rocket assaults on Israel, Obama declared, “We support [Israel’s] military efforts … No nation should accept rockets being fired into its borders or terrorists tunneling into its territory.”

But Obama’s policy is entirely different –– imposing what he calls “an immediate, unconditional humanitarian cease-fire that ends hostilities now.” Moreover, Secretary of State John Kerry informed Hamas via Qatar that Hamas’ demands for weakening the Israeli blockade would be met. In attempting to reach this cease-fire, Obama has bypassed the Palestinian Authority and Egypt –– Hamas antagonists–– and worked closely with Qatar and Turkey –– both munificent Hamas supporters.

In short, the idea that Israel should stop defending its citizens and territory from Hamas assault is not President Obama’s policy position –– merely his policy objective.

It is surely obvious that if one supports a country dealing militarily with terrorist assault, then calling for an immediate cease-fire that preserves the terrorists’ infrastructure and awards them concessions flatly contradicts and nullifies this support.

Other developments in recent weeks also suggest that Obama has Hamas’ back, not Israel’s:

1. He supported the formation of a Hamas/Fatah Palestinian Authority (PA) unity regime, meaning that Hamas, a Nazi-like terrorist organization that calls in its Charter for the worldwide murder of Jews, would be part of the PA.

2. He had Secretary of State John Kerry announce last week $47 million in additional aid to Gaza, which, as Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has observed, “is in effect $47 million for Hamas … Aiding Hamas while simultaneously isolating Israel does two things. One, it helps our enemy. Two, it hurts our ally.”

3. He had the the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) impose, not merely a warning, but an astonishing ban on flight to Israel –– something not see on far more hazardous destinations like Iraq, Pakistan or Ukraine –– creating the suspicion that it was a form of pressure on Israel to agree to his ceasefire.

More troubling still is that this fits a pre-existing pattern. Consider the following:

Egypt: When in June 2009, Obama addressed the Muslim world in Cairo, he insisted on inviting members of the (then-banned) radical Muslim Brotherhood over the objections of U.S. ally, Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak – though the Obama administration later denied that it did so. (A furious Mubarak refused to attend.)

When a groundswell of opposition to Mubarak’s rule arose in February 2011, Obama called for Mubarak to step down “now” while his spokesman called for early elections involving “non-secular actors” –– despite the near certainty that radical Muslim groups would triumph in elections.

When the Muslim Brotherhood senior leader and candidate for president Mohamed Morsi was, unsurprisingly, elected president, Obama did not discontinue arming the regime. Conversely, when in July 2013 Morsi was ousted by the Egyptian military under Field Marshal Abdul el-Sisi, Obama suspended military aid.

Iran: In 2009, when Iranians were brutalized on Tehran’s streets for protesting the rigged re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Obama did not call for Ahmadinejad to step down and back democracy protesters –– he pointedly refused to get involved.

Last year, following somewhat tightened UN Security Council sanctions on Iran, Obama agreed  to weaken them, granting Iran some $20 billion in sanctions relief over 6 months (not merely $6-7 billion, as the Administration initially claimed) under the terms of the Geneva interim agreement. This permitted Iran to retain intact all the essential elements of its nuclear weapons program – its Arak plutonium plant; continued uranium enrichment; intercontinental ballistic missile programs, even its enriched uranium stocks. (Iran was simply required to reduce these to an oxide, which can be restored in weeks to weapons-grade uranium.)

Afghanistan: Last month, President Obama freed five senior Taliban terrorist commanders in exchange for an American serviceman who may have been a deserter.

This record speaks for itself. Obama favors accommodation with and empowerment of radical Islam. He has less interest in traditional U.S. allies and is willing to pick fights with them or abandon them. This now appears to be true in respect of his policy toward Israel and Hamas.

Indeed, Obama already assisted Hamas’ current aggression at the last Israel/Hamas cease-fire in 2012: he pressured Israel then into allowing Hamas to import into Gaza previously prohibited cement and steel. With these, Hamas has spent over $1 billion on constructing, not schools or hospitals, but a sophisticated terror tunnel network that we now know was designed to enable Hamas to dispatch 200 jihadists to carry out mass casualty terror attacks and kidnappings inside Israel on Rosh Hashanah.

And yet Obama wants Israel’s operation to destroy the Hamas tunnels and rocket launchers to end now, ensuring that Hamas can resume its offensive at any moment of its choosing. This is a prescription for renewed and intensified bloodshed. It certainly not a matter of having Israel’s back. Given Obama’s record, we shouldn’t be surprised.

Morton A. Klein is National President of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). Dr. Daniel Mandel is Director of the ZOA’ s Center for Middle East Policy and author of H.V. Evatt & the Creation of Israel (Routledge, London, 2004). This article was originally published by the San Diego Jewish Journal.