The position of Israel regarding drawing a map is that too much is at stake to risk its security, so its borders have to be defensible. The position of the Palestinians is that, apart from some minor and mutually agreeable swaps, the boundaries of Israel would be those of the 1949 Armistice Lines drawn between Israeli forces and the forces of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. That's what they mean by the "1967 lines" when in reality there were never any lines agreed upon for mutual recognition between Israel and a Palestinian Arab state. President Barack Hussein Obama came down fully on the side of the Palestinian territorial demands, and threw away Israel's needs for secure boundaries.
This is contrary to the wishes of most Americans, who generally side with Israel rather than the Hamas and Fatah terrorists seeking to put Israel in indefensible borders. Nevertheless, Obama is a True Believer in making the maximum possible gift to the Hamas-Fatah terrorist partnership, and he doesn't really care one iota that the gift he wants to give will come at the expense of Israel's security.
The return to the lines of the 1949 Armistice Agreement would give Israel a width of only about 9 miles. There have been attempts to slice Israel, and a return to those lines would be a constant temptation to continue such efforts. It is not possible for Israelis to agree to such a suicidal plan. For it to be the basis of negotiations would be to bias the negotiations so that Israel appears as a supplicant that has lost all of its negotiating cards. This tilting of the negotiations seems to be the main objective of President Barack Hussein Obama, because he has also not mentioned resolving the Casus Beli of the Palestinian Arabs, which is their demand for millions of hostile Arabs to flood into Israel. This is a no brainer for anybody who understands the consequences of such a flood of hostile immigration: there would be a civil war, the millions of hostile Arabs would multiply, and the result would be the death of the Jewish state.
So the mask has been dropped. Mr. Obama has given his endorsement, essentially, to preparing the way for the jihad of the sword, while keeping his silence and thereby giving his tacit approval of the jihad of immigration and the jihad of the womb.
In addition, he has called for a contiguous Palestinian state, which would come at the expense of Israel's contiguity. There is no land connection between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. To provide one would split Israel, which apparently is what he wants to do. Also, he said that Egypt and Jordan would be borders of the Palestinian state, but he only mentioned that Israel would border Palestine. Therefore, he envisions Israel giving up its vital presence, both in terms of population and in terms of soldiers, at the River Jordan, to prevent an infiltration of rockets, missiles, mujahadeen, and even an invasion of tanks. So he has given formulas for dicing and slicing Israel, while not addressing the Casus Beli, and not providing any situation that would allow for Palestinian concessions, nor for Israeli security (except of meaningless words that he is all for Israel's security while giving formulas to gravely harm Israel's security and means of defending its borders and its population.
Obama has thrown away the promises made to Israel by the previous administration, the administration of President George W. Bush, that Israel would not return to the 1949 Armistice Lines, that a solution to the Arab refugee problem would be found outside the boundaries of Israel, and that the major settlement blocs that have formed during the demographic changes that took place over the last 44 years would be part of Israel while other settlements would be part of the negotiation.
Territorially, he has not allowed any daylight between his position and the position of the Palestinian Arabs, and of course by doing this he is encouraging countries and groups and individuals around the world to support that position and put pressure on Israel. Might this be fairly described as his portraying himself as a mentor and leader and agent of the Palestinian Arabs? He did this with his advocacy of the Palestinian Arab desire to have 500,000 Jews living in Judea and Samaria and northern, southern and eastern Jerusalem to be deprived of their property rights and of their right to pursue their needs by building for their needs just as all people in the world are able to do. The result of that was that the Palestinian Arabs ratcheted up their demands, and refused to negotiate until Israel met the demands of Obama. Now he has escalated his diplomatic assault on Israel by ignoring Israel's needs, and calling for the basis of negotiations to be the Arab demand for Israel to return to the 1949 Armistice Lines, and the result of this of course will be a new ratcheting up of Palestinian demands. This is not rocket science. The more Obama escalates his demands on Israel, the more other countries will follow his lead, and even go further since they cannot be seen to be less "pro-Palestinian" than the US, and the more the Palestinian Arabs will escalate their own demands. For how can the Palestinians be less pro-Palestinian than the US?
Do you remember the antics of Milton Berle on TV, when his audience gave him applause? With one arm he would hold up a hand to say "stop", and with the other arm he would enthusiastically wave his hand to encourage the applause to continue. He would send out this mixed message, and it would be funny to see. Mr. Obama does the same thing. He raised the demand of stopping Jews living in Judea, Samaria, and northern, southern, and eastern Jerusalem from building -- anything -- to deprive them of their property rights and to take away their right to build for their needs. He said it was illegal for Jews to be doing building, in lands that had been conquered and occupied from 1948 to 1967 by the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan. The Palestinian Arabs took up his demands, and so did the international community. But when countries brought their demand to declare the settlements illegal to the UN Security Council, he did two things, a la Milton Berle. He vetoed their intended resolution at the UN Security Council, while simultaneously he had his ambassador vigorously denounce any building by Jews in the failed 1948-1967 Jordanian jihad territory as illegal.
It seems that he might be contemplating another such Milton Berle two-armed mixed message. His wants Israel to return to the "Auschwitz lines" (as Abba Eban eloquently called them) of 1949 and made a speech to give it much publicity. But he has indicated that when the matter comes to the UN Security Council he will veto it. If he follows through with Milton Berle, he will also have his ambassador give another speech supporting such a return to the Auschwitz lines.
It appears that Obama supports the goals of the ethnic cleansers, but wants to be on record as opposing their methods. And his Milton Berle antics of encouraging other countries to pressure Israel while he vetoes their efforts at the UN Security Council are his method of "leading from behind", to get other countries to do his dirtiest work of putting pressure on Israel while he claims innocence-per-veto.
