Alternatives to surrender
By Caroline Glick, JPOST
[..] WHEN NETANYAHU entered office last spring his desire to appease Obama was understandable. At the time, he was operating under the hope that perhaps Obama could be appeased into ending his onslaught against the Jewish state. But the events of the past year have made clear that Obama is unappeasable. Every concession Israel has made to Obama has merely whetted the US president’s appetite for more.
The policy implications of this state of affairs are clear. First, Israel must strive to weaken Obama. Since Israeli concessions to Obama strengthen him, Israel must first and foremost stop giving him concessions.
Weakening Obama does not involve openly attacking him. It means Israel should act in a way that advances its interests and forces Obama to reconsider the desirability of his current foreign policy.
Regionally, Israel should make common cause with the Kurds of Iran, Iraq and Syria who are now being assaulted by Iran, Turkey and Syria. Doing so is not simply the moral thing to do. It weakens Iran, Syria and Turkey and demonstrates that Obama’s appeasement policies are harming those who love freedom and empowering those who hate it.
By the same token, Israel should do everything it can to strengthen the Iranian Green movement. Every anti-regime action in Iran – regardless of its size – harms the regime and therefore helps Israel. And every anti-regime action in Iran exposes the moral depravity and strategic idiocy of Obama’s policy of appeasing the mullocracy.
AS FOR the US domestic political realm, in Ambassador Michael Oren’s all but schizophrenic recent statements about the Obama administration’s policy towards Israel, we may at last be witnessing an embrace of political sanity on the part of the government.
For the past several months, Oren has acted as the Obama administration’s most energetic cheerleader to the US Jewish community.
He has repeatedly and wrongly reassured US Jewish audiences that Obama is a great friend of Israel, that his Democratic Party remains loyal to the US-Israel alliance and that the Republicans are wrong to claim that there is a difference between the two major US political parties when it comes to supporting Israel.
The pinnacle of Oren’s pro-Obama campaign came with his interview last week with The Jerusalem Post. There he brought all of these false and counter-productive claims into the public realm. Apparently Oren’s decision to make his adulation of the Obama administration public finally forced his bosses in Jerusalem to order him to cease, desist and do an about face.
And so, last week, Oren told a closed audience of Israeli diplomats the truth. Under Obama, Oren whispered, there has been a “tectonic rift” in US relations with Israel. While some of Obama’s advisers are sympathetic to Israel, these advisers have no influence on Obama’s positions on Israel.
No doubt recognizing how silly his about face made him look, Oren tried to deny his statements at the Foreign Ministry. But it is hard to imagine anyone will take him seriously.
During his visit to the White House next week, Netanyahu should follow the path set by Oren’s quickly leaked remarks. Netanyahu should abstain from praising Obama for his friendship and speak instead about the fact that the US-Israel alliance is vital for both countries’ national security.
Netanyahu should insist on the right to call on questioners at his joint appearance with Obama. And he should use those questions and those appearances to discuss why Israel’s actions are not only legal and necessary for Israel, but vital for US national security. During his stay in the US, Netanyahu should discuss the global jihad, Islamic terrorism, the freedom-loving Kurds and the freedom-loving Iranian people every chance he gets.
Indeed, he should create opportunities to discuss them.
Here we see a crucial point of convergence between the Schalit family march to Jerusalem and Netanyahu’s trip to Washington. To increase the effectiveness of their efforts on behalf of Gilad, ahead of Netanyahu’s visit to Washington, the marchers should split into two groups.
The first group should continue to Jerusalem and demand that Israel take a firmer stand against Hamas. The second group should walk to Tel Aviv and camp out outside the US Embassy. There they should demand that the administration end its contacts with Hamas, end its pressure on the Israeli government to strengthen Hamas, cancel Obama’s plan to give an additional $400 million dollars in aid to Hamas and use the US’s position on the UN Security Council to condemn Turkey for its material support for Hamas.
For too long, by allowing themselves to be led by our deranged media, Israeli citizens and governments alike have ignored the basic fact that the answer to every question is not more Israeli concessions. Contrary to what our tabloids would have us believe, surrender is only one option among many. It is time we try out some alternatives.
caroline@carolineglick.com
Most of the Jews like davidstill will still vote for him. Screw the Liberal Jews, they are beyond pathetic they are vile.
Nonsense. Obama’s poll ratings are dropping like a ton of bricks. I can’t think of a better time for Israel to tell obama to “shove it” given his current weakened position.
No one has to make Obama weak; Obama is a weak personality given immense power—a recipe for self destruction, which, will result in catastrophic consequences for others affected by his decisions.
Obama will destroy himself. It is only a pity that those who merely report his demise as it happens will be accused of causing it. So what came first? Obama the chicken, or the rotten egg he laid?
David Still, your ignorance is spilling out of your rearend. Te majority of the American public has far better feelings toward Israel than the Obama administration. Most American do understand where Obama’s sympathies lie, with Muslims. He is so anti-Semetic and anti-Israel that he will try to punish anyone who sides with them. It will cost him the Congress this coming fall and his presidency in 2012.
I’m crying cold borscht if true…. I don’t care.
This is a typical Hymie line, are you sure you’re not him? In any case not true and if anything the converse to that thought is true.
Most Israelis would agree and support dumping the Arabs,dumping Hussein, and be unyielding to any pressure.
Most would agree to telling the world to shove it. Lieberman talks but is very ambitious….Same as BB with a Russian accent.
http://yhoo.it/cIwQ0I
I know Oren said what he was told to say.
Bad mouthing is the way to go.
the notion stated above that “Obama must be weakened” will not sit well with a lot of Americans, who will rally to the support of their president from such advice coming from a major donor to keeping Israel alive…
There is a continuing notion in man y of these posts that Israel simp;ly must dump Arabs, dump Obama, be tough and non-yielding, and who cares what the rest of the world thinks or does…that is a useless approach.Here is another outspoken guy who further compounds a difficult situation;
http://yhoo.it/cIwQ0I
ps: I suspect Oren spoke off the cuff and got caught in a PR mistake. Again, he can not come to the US and speak at a half dozen graduations and then badmouth the present administration.
Here’s Glick’s idea of an “offensive”:
This is from Glick’s article, Weathering the approaching storm, published less than 2 weeks ago.
She’s slipping.
How ong will it take before Glick Criticizes BB by name directly?
Last week she blamed Barak, this week Oren. Who’s The Boss?
If Oren was speaking on behalf of BB he shouldn’t be criticized, BB should. If Oren was making his own foreign Policy that’s even worse, BB should have fired him and both BB and Oren should have been pilloried by Glick.
Anyway you look at it it’s all BB and Glick still refuses to criticize BB and protects him by blaming the little people.
I like Glick but her blind spot for BB destroys her credibility.
She is thus intellectually dishonest to her readers and herself.