President Barack Hussein Obama has a plan for Israel. The basis of negotiations with the Palestinians will be a return to 1967 (meaning Israel goes back to the Armistice Lines of 1949, that is the cease fire lines of 1948), and then Israel and the Palestinians are invited to participate in mutually agreed swaps of land. That is, first Israel is required to commit to a return to pre-war 1967, and then it is allowed to trade if the Palestinians are willing. Trade what? Give up pre-1967 land.
This has several purposes before the actual negotiations for a trade begin.
The first objective of Obama is to crush Israel's morale, by requiring Israel to agree to give up the Western Wall (the holiest place where Jews are allowed to pray), the Jewish Quarter of the Old City (the holiest place where Jews can live), and the Temple Mount (the holiest place). Also, Israel is required to give up half of its capital city Jerusalem before the negotiations begin. Also, there is the reverse of Obama's amnesty program for half of Jerusalem's Jews and for all of the Jews of Judea and Samaria, 600,000 in all. These citizens of Israel would become illegal aliens, and be on the path to being expelled from their homes and communities, becoming displaced persons. Obama speaks of the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, their inalienable rights, and their needs (including the needs of the people of Gaza). But for these 600,000 victims of Obama, they are not spoken of as people with aspirations, rights or needs. Perhaps Obama regards them as bumps on the road, perhaps as road kill. This would precede the negotiations, because Obama did not want any emotional issues to be dealt with at first, and producing this road kill is not an emotional issue for Obama. A poll of Israelis a few years ago showed that 96% would rather keep the Western Wall than have "peace". But this is not an emotional issue for Obama. The purpose of all this is to crush the morale of Israelis.
The second purpose, a very serious one, is to crush Israel's ability to defend itself. Israel would commit itself to lines that are indefensible boundaries, with a territory that is 9 miles wide. This would produce instability, and a temptation and empowerment of radical jihadis. But this isn't enough in crushing Israel's security. Obama's speech at the State Department also appears to have ruled out Israel's extremely important security need: a long-term security envelope around the Palestinian entity, including a long-term Israeli military presence in the Jordan River Valley. This military presence would allow the Israelis to prevent rockets, missiles and other weapons and military equipment from getting into the West Bank, where rockets and missiles could be fired at planes in the air at Israel's airport, and which would allow rockets and missiles to be fired at Israel's population centers, which would not be far from the territory that the Palestinians would command. This military presence would also allow the Israelis to intercept jihadis heading across the Jordan River into the West Bank, to carry out terror attacks on Israelis. This military presence would also allow the Israeli military force there to delay any enemy armed attack across the Jordan River until the Israeli reserve army could mobilize. With revolutions sweeping the Arab world, there is no knowing what governments will be in power in the region several years from now, let alone in the longer term, so Israel has to be prepared for both an invasion coming from a new and hostile government right across the Jordan River, and for an invasion that originates somewhat further and forces the government of Jordan to allow it to go and fight against Israel. None of this matters to Obama, who wants to substitute worthless security "guarantees" instead of allowing an Israeli military presence to defend its vital survival interests. Obama himself even showed the value of guarantees by trashing the assurances that Israel had received from then-President George W. Bush, that American policy was for Israel to retain the settlement blocs, and that the Arab refugee problem needed to be solved outside of Israel. He even sent a letter stating that, and it was endorsed by both houses of Congress. Yet the Obama administration first insisted that no understandings or agreements existed, and later Sec. of State Hillary Clinton said that anyhow any agreements could not be enforced. Later Obama trashed these further by insisting that the basis of negotiations must be a return to 1967, and by ditching any specific requirements on the Palestinians so that the Bush understandings vanished down the memory hole. With that as an example, Obama wants Israel to rely on "guarantees". He has a sense of humor, I see. In any case, Obama has taken pains to be sure that Israel would not be able to defend itself, in the ways that are very important to Israel.
The third purpose of Obama is to eliminate Israel's ability to negotiate. Israel's negotiating chips are the territories that it won in the 1967 war. But Obama demands that Israel agree to give up that territory, to give up its negotiating chips, before the negotiations begin. So how can it effectively negotiate for reconciliation and security? It's like being asked to have an auction to sell one's stuff, but before the auction begins, one is strangely required to give away all of the stuff. How can one then have the auction? No matter, that's what Obama, in his role as advocate for the Palestinians, mentor to the Palestinians, and agent for the Palestinians requires of Israel.
Another item that Obama included in his speech was the requirement that the end result end up with contiguity -- that is, connectedness -- for the Palestinian entity. But since the Gaza Strip is miles away from the West Bank, separated by Israel, what Obama wants is for Israel to give up a strip of land to connect the Gaza Strip with the West Bank. This would give the jihadist terrorists and other Palestinian warriors a ready path between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and it would sever Israel into two states. But no worry, the Palestinians are Obama's clients, so he gifts them with contiguity by removing it from Israel.
From Obama's statement about his plan, we can see that his purpose is to crush Israel's morale, crush Israel's ability to defend itself, and crush Israel's ability to negotiate (e.g., to recover its valuable assets and rights, to gain reconciliation, and to gain security). And if there are any agreed land swaps after Israel capitulated by agreeing to return to pre-war 1967, the land would be torn out of Israel's pre-1967 territory, allowing Obama to satisfy himself that he has helped to slice and dice Israel to prepare for the later attacks on Israel by radical jihadists.
Showing posts with label 1967 lines. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1967 lines. Show all posts
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Obama negotiating plan would be a disaster for Israel
A plan for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, originally put forward by Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas and now endorsed by President Obama would be a disaster for Israel for several reasons.
First, Israel would be required to accept negotiations "based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps". The return-to-1967 idea is itself a disaster for Israel. It means that Israel loses the Western Wall, it loses the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, it loses half of its capital Jerusalem and has to expel the 250,000 Jewish residents of the targeted area of Jerusalem, it loses all of Judea and Samaria and has to expel its 320,000 Jewish residents, and Israel would be reduced to having a territorial width that is 9 miles wide with indefensible borders.
Secondly, Israel would not be permitted to negotiate until it agreed to this back-to-1967 plan, which means that it would not be permitted to negotiate until it agreed to give up all of its negotiating chips.
Thirdly, when the negotiations become deadlocked, Israel would be required to return to the indefensible 1967 lines.
Fourthly, the most important matter that Israel needs to trade for its negotiating chips, solving the Arab refugee problem outside of Israel's borders, would be kept off the table according to President Obama. But that is the Palestinians' casus belli, their pretext for continued war. That assures that Israel will neither have any negotiating chips nor will the issue even get to the table, so the problem will certainly not be solved, and the pretext for Palestinian war against Israel will continue indefinitely.
All in all, this is not a preparation for peace, but a preparation for indefinite war. It involves an assault against the rights of pilgrims, creating an unstable situation with indefensible Israeli borders that will tempt jihadist terrorists, rocketeers, and armies to attack Israel, and that won't get to address the casus belli of the Palestinians.
Nor will there be any effort to get to the heart of the matter, which is that the Muslims have control over a stretch of land from the Atlantic Ocean to beyond the Persian Gulf, save for a bit of mostly sand called Israel and ruled by infidels -- the Jews. The followers of political Islam cannot accept this, and want to wipe out this infidel-ruled piece of land in their midst. Obama's plan to slice and dice Israel by shrinking Israel's borders to those of 1967 and giving the jihadists the Jewish holy places will not make the Islamists less desirous of wiping out Israel. Just the opposite, the weaker Israel is and appears, the more they will smell blood, and the more they will be emboldened to try to wipe out Israel. Obama's plan is land-for-war.
First, Israel would be required to accept negotiations "based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps". The return-to-1967 idea is itself a disaster for Israel. It means that Israel loses the Western Wall, it loses the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, it loses half of its capital Jerusalem and has to expel the 250,000 Jewish residents of the targeted area of Jerusalem, it loses all of Judea and Samaria and has to expel its 320,000 Jewish residents, and Israel would be reduced to having a territorial width that is 9 miles wide with indefensible borders.
Secondly, Israel would not be permitted to negotiate until it agreed to this back-to-1967 plan, which means that it would not be permitted to negotiate until it agreed to give up all of its negotiating chips.
Thirdly, when the negotiations become deadlocked, Israel would be required to return to the indefensible 1967 lines.
Fourthly, the most important matter that Israel needs to trade for its negotiating chips, solving the Arab refugee problem outside of Israel's borders, would be kept off the table according to President Obama. But that is the Palestinians' casus belli, their pretext for continued war. That assures that Israel will neither have any negotiating chips nor will the issue even get to the table, so the problem will certainly not be solved, and the pretext for Palestinian war against Israel will continue indefinitely.
All in all, this is not a preparation for peace, but a preparation for indefinite war. It involves an assault against the rights of pilgrims, creating an unstable situation with indefensible Israeli borders that will tempt jihadist terrorists, rocketeers, and armies to attack Israel, and that won't get to address the casus belli of the Palestinians.
Nor will there be any effort to get to the heart of the matter, which is that the Muslims have control over a stretch of land from the Atlantic Ocean to beyond the Persian Gulf, save for a bit of mostly sand called Israel and ruled by infidels -- the Jews. The followers of political Islam cannot accept this, and want to wipe out this infidel-ruled piece of land in their midst. Obama's plan to slice and dice Israel by shrinking Israel's borders to those of 1967 and giving the jihadists the Jewish holy places will not make the Islamists less desirous of wiping out Israel. Just the opposite, the weaker Israel is and appears, the more they will smell blood, and the more they will be emboldened to try to wipe out Israel. Obama's plan is land-for-war.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Obama's poison pill
Obama has offered a formula to Israel, for land changes "based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps", which is a poison pill for Israel.
The part that becomes deadly afterward is that before the negotiations start, Obama wants Israel to agree to the 1967 lines as a basis for negotiation. In effect he is saying: "Accept this formula, and some time later I will explain to you what your obligations are according to this formula".
The Jordanians have no interest in returning to claim the territory that they conquered and held from 1948-1967, so it means turning over the territory to the Hamas-Fatah partnership. That is, promising to give up the Western Wall, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, the Temple Mount, half of Jerusalem, expelling the 250,000 Jews living in Jerusalem in the area targeted by the ethnic cleansers and their helpers, all of Judea and Samaria, and the 320,000 Jews living in Judea and Samaria. It means indefensible borders reducing Israel to 9 miles in width. It means that Israel gives up a military presence along the Jordan River, which was demanded in Obama's statement about a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces. It means a disastrous, perilous situation for Israel, and a demand for that will be coming when that phase of the poison pill takes effect.
After Israel agrees to the poison pill formula, the negotiations will become deadlocked, because it profits the Palestinians to produce a deadlock which will reward them with the 1967 lines. For example, the jihadists of Hamas will welcome obtaining the Western Wall from Israel, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City (with its Jewish residents expelled), and complete control over the Temple Mount. Even if Israel offered half of pre-1967 Israel in an effort to ransom the holy places, this will not be good enough for Hamas (although it would be a disaster in itself for Israel to offer such a ransom). The deadlock will cause Obama to spring into action, and accuse Israel of reneging on its promise, unless it agrees to go to the 1967 indefensible borders. He will say something like: "The United States does not accept the legitimacy of Israel's refusal to go back to the 1967 borders." He will get the international community to back his threat that Israel will be isolated in the world if it doesn't go back to the 1967 borders. He will say that Israel has reneged on its promise, and is therefore in violation of international law. He will say that this behavior by Israel is an insult to the U.S. He will say that this behavior is causing instability in the world, and causing American deaths.
Mr. Obama tries to move into his plan gradually, not all at once. But once Israel agrees to accepting a return to the 1967 lines as a basis for negotiation, Israel will have legitimized this concept of returning to the 1967 lines, and will open itself for the next phase, which will come when there is a deadlock. That phase is the demand, backed by threats by Obama and the international community, for Israel to go back to the 1967 lines.
The maximum pressure on Israel will come during Obama's second term. He will not exert maximum pressure during his first term, because Jews contribute more than 50% of the donations received by Democrats running for political office (even though they are nationally a small percentage of the total number of voters). He will not exert maximum pressure during his first term, because in the key battleground state of Florida, with 29 electoral votes and a history of switching between the parties in different elections, the significant Jewish vote there could make a difference that affects which presidential candidate wins Florida's 29 electoral votes, a sizable amount. But after the November 2012 election, he will feel free to exert all the pressure he likes against Israel. And that's when the poison aspect of the poison pill will start to be felt.
Accepting, and therefore legitimizing, a plan involving a return to 1967, whether as a goal for negotiations, or as the starting point of negotiations, or as the official mediator's position, or as a basis for negotiations, would be an invitation to disaster for Israel. When a deadlock in the negotiations occurs, that 1967 situation would become the default, and it would be demanded that Israel go back to 1967.
The part that becomes deadly afterward is that before the negotiations start, Obama wants Israel to agree to the 1967 lines as a basis for negotiation. In effect he is saying: "Accept this formula, and some time later I will explain to you what your obligations are according to this formula".
The Jordanians have no interest in returning to claim the territory that they conquered and held from 1948-1967, so it means turning over the territory to the Hamas-Fatah partnership. That is, promising to give up the Western Wall, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, the Temple Mount, half of Jerusalem, expelling the 250,000 Jews living in Jerusalem in the area targeted by the ethnic cleansers and their helpers, all of Judea and Samaria, and the 320,000 Jews living in Judea and Samaria. It means indefensible borders reducing Israel to 9 miles in width. It means that Israel gives up a military presence along the Jordan River, which was demanded in Obama's statement about a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces. It means a disastrous, perilous situation for Israel, and a demand for that will be coming when that phase of the poison pill takes effect.
After Israel agrees to the poison pill formula, the negotiations will become deadlocked, because it profits the Palestinians to produce a deadlock which will reward them with the 1967 lines. For example, the jihadists of Hamas will welcome obtaining the Western Wall from Israel, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City (with its Jewish residents expelled), and complete control over the Temple Mount. Even if Israel offered half of pre-1967 Israel in an effort to ransom the holy places, this will not be good enough for Hamas (although it would be a disaster in itself for Israel to offer such a ransom). The deadlock will cause Obama to spring into action, and accuse Israel of reneging on its promise, unless it agrees to go to the 1967 indefensible borders. He will say something like: "The United States does not accept the legitimacy of Israel's refusal to go back to the 1967 borders." He will get the international community to back his threat that Israel will be isolated in the world if it doesn't go back to the 1967 borders. He will say that Israel has reneged on its promise, and is therefore in violation of international law. He will say that this behavior by Israel is an insult to the U.S. He will say that this behavior is causing instability in the world, and causing American deaths.
Mr. Obama tries to move into his plan gradually, not all at once. But once Israel agrees to accepting a return to the 1967 lines as a basis for negotiation, Israel will have legitimized this concept of returning to the 1967 lines, and will open itself for the next phase, which will come when there is a deadlock. That phase is the demand, backed by threats by Obama and the international community, for Israel to go back to the 1967 lines.
The maximum pressure on Israel will come during Obama's second term. He will not exert maximum pressure during his first term, because Jews contribute more than 50% of the donations received by Democrats running for political office (even though they are nationally a small percentage of the total number of voters). He will not exert maximum pressure during his first term, because in the key battleground state of Florida, with 29 electoral votes and a history of switching between the parties in different elections, the significant Jewish vote there could make a difference that affects which presidential candidate wins Florida's 29 electoral votes, a sizable amount. But after the November 2012 election, he will feel free to exert all the pressure he likes against Israel. And that's when the poison aspect of the poison pill will start to be felt.
Accepting, and therefore legitimizing, a plan involving a return to 1967, whether as a goal for negotiations, or as the starting point of negotiations, or as the official mediator's position, or as a basis for negotiations, would be an invitation to disaster for Israel. When a deadlock in the negotiations occurs, that 1967 situation would become the default, and it would be demanded that Israel go back to 1967.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Abbas-Obama plan: First Israel capitulates then it may negotiate
The plan put forward by President Obama, which copies the territorial demands made by the Palestinians and trashes Israel's demand for a long term military presence along the Jordan, is that first Israel capitulates by agreeing to accept the pre-war 1967 lines, and then it may negotiate with the Palestinians.
In the first phase, Israel capitulates by agreeing to: hand over the Western Wall, the holiest prayer site of all Jews, to the Hamas jihadists and their Fatah partners; hand over to the genocidal jihadists Hamas the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, which has been a residence of devout Jews for centuries (apart from the 1948-1967 Jordanian conquest and occupation); hand over the Temple Mount, which has been the holiest of places for the Jews since even centuries before the birth of Mohammed; make 250,000 people living in Israel's capital to have the status of illegal aliens subject to expulsion or worse whims of the Hamas genocidal jihadists, for the crime of living in Jerusalem while being Jewish; slice Israel's capital city and take half of it away; make 320,000 people living in Judea and Samaria illegal aliens subject to expulsion or worse for the crime of being Jewish while living in the Jewish ancestral homeland; force Israel to the indefensible "1967 lines", the armistice lines of 1949 that lasted until the war of 1967, which give Israel a width of 9 miles and are an invitation to warfare by Israel's neighbors; give up Israel's military presence along the Jordan River, which is essential to prevent smuggling of rockets and jihadis, and to engage any invading military force to give Israel time to call up its reserve army. This demand by Obama, to prevent Israel from any hope of security by eliminating the possibility of a long-term Israeli military force along the Jordan River, was not even mentioned by the Palestinians, but now it is part of the US demand to really crush Israel's security before it is even allowed to negotiate.
There may be other demands that would be part of the required Israeli capitulation before it is allowed to negotiate. Obama mentioned contiguity for a Palestinian state. But the Gaza Strip does not abut the West Bank, so from what we have already seen from Obama, it appears that he would interpret this as Israel consenting to split Israel in half in order to join the Gaza Strip and the West Bank
The Palestinians have also added another demand that they want from Israel before they would allow negotiation. This would be to remove property rights and any building for their needs in the areas where the more than 500,000 victims of the ethnic cleansers are living -- that is, in Judea and Samaria, and northern, southern, and eastern Jerusalem, which would apply only against Jews. Obama has already delegitimized the rights of these victims, so he may also interpret this Palestinian demand as part of his own demands before Israel is allowed to negotiate.
What Obama will, in effect, say to the Israelis is: agree to say the following words (and he will have prepared the words that he wants the prime minister of Israel to say), and later I will tell you what you have committed to.
Obama has a special relationship with matters legal. For example, he got his start in politics by entering a large field of Democratic candidates for a position in the Illinois legislature, and then challenging the signatures of all of his rivals on their nominating petitions. He got all of the candidates except himself to be ruled as disqualified, including even the incumbent (who had been his mentor), and he ran without any opposition.
He participated in the delegitimization campaign against Israel, by deciding to trash the property rights of Jews living in Judea, Samaria, and northern, southern, and eastern Jerusalem. He didn't bother to give any reason for this, instead proclaiming that the United States does not accept the legitimacy (of what he interpreted to be any building activity whatsoever by these victims, or in the designated areas to be ethnically cleansed).
Perhaps he decided that once Netanyahu agreed to give a try to a 10-month building moratorium, that was an admission that property rights were illegitimate, and never mind that there was a time limit, and never mind that it was conditioned on the expectation that the Palestinians would negotiate.
On the other hand, regarding the US war in Libya, he tells Congress that Le loi, c'est moi, the law is me. No going to Congress to satisfy the Constitution or the War Powers Act. He decides the law.
Having seen what Obama does, my guess is that once Israel agrees to Obama's formula -- say, accepting a return to 1967 lines as the basis of negotiations, with mutually agreed swaps -- and if, as expected a deadlock arises regarding agreed swaps and any further negotiations come to a stand still, then Obama will say that Israel must return to the 1967 lines or it is in violation of its own promises and therefore in violation of international law. He is collecting international support for doing this to Israel, and he will threaten Israel with international isolation if it does not go to the indefensible 1967 lines. The maximum pressure on Israel from Obama will come during his second term in office, or even right after the November 2012 election, when he is no longer seeking votes or donations, and feels free to do to Israel whatever he likes.
In the first phase, Israel capitulates by agreeing to: hand over the Western Wall, the holiest prayer site of all Jews, to the Hamas jihadists and their Fatah partners; hand over to the genocidal jihadists Hamas the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, which has been a residence of devout Jews for centuries (apart from the 1948-1967 Jordanian conquest and occupation); hand over the Temple Mount, which has been the holiest of places for the Jews since even centuries before the birth of Mohammed; make 250,000 people living in Israel's capital to have the status of illegal aliens subject to expulsion or worse whims of the Hamas genocidal jihadists, for the crime of living in Jerusalem while being Jewish; slice Israel's capital city and take half of it away; make 320,000 people living in Judea and Samaria illegal aliens subject to expulsion or worse for the crime of being Jewish while living in the Jewish ancestral homeland; force Israel to the indefensible "1967 lines", the armistice lines of 1949 that lasted until the war of 1967, which give Israel a width of 9 miles and are an invitation to warfare by Israel's neighbors; give up Israel's military presence along the Jordan River, which is essential to prevent smuggling of rockets and jihadis, and to engage any invading military force to give Israel time to call up its reserve army. This demand by Obama, to prevent Israel from any hope of security by eliminating the possibility of a long-term Israeli military force along the Jordan River, was not even mentioned by the Palestinians, but now it is part of the US demand to really crush Israel's security before it is even allowed to negotiate.
There may be other demands that would be part of the required Israeli capitulation before it is allowed to negotiate. Obama mentioned contiguity for a Palestinian state. But the Gaza Strip does not abut the West Bank, so from what we have already seen from Obama, it appears that he would interpret this as Israel consenting to split Israel in half in order to join the Gaza Strip and the West Bank
The Palestinians have also added another demand that they want from Israel before they would allow negotiation. This would be to remove property rights and any building for their needs in the areas where the more than 500,000 victims of the ethnic cleansers are living -- that is, in Judea and Samaria, and northern, southern, and eastern Jerusalem, which would apply only against Jews. Obama has already delegitimized the rights of these victims, so he may also interpret this Palestinian demand as part of his own demands before Israel is allowed to negotiate.
What Obama will, in effect, say to the Israelis is: agree to say the following words (and he will have prepared the words that he wants the prime minister of Israel to say), and later I will tell you what you have committed to.
Obama has a special relationship with matters legal. For example, he got his start in politics by entering a large field of Democratic candidates for a position in the Illinois legislature, and then challenging the signatures of all of his rivals on their nominating petitions. He got all of the candidates except himself to be ruled as disqualified, including even the incumbent (who had been his mentor), and he ran without any opposition.
He participated in the delegitimization campaign against Israel, by deciding to trash the property rights of Jews living in Judea, Samaria, and northern, southern, and eastern Jerusalem. He didn't bother to give any reason for this, instead proclaiming that the United States does not accept the legitimacy (of what he interpreted to be any building activity whatsoever by these victims, or in the designated areas to be ethnically cleansed).
Perhaps he decided that once Netanyahu agreed to give a try to a 10-month building moratorium, that was an admission that property rights were illegitimate, and never mind that there was a time limit, and never mind that it was conditioned on the expectation that the Palestinians would negotiate.
On the other hand, regarding the US war in Libya, he tells Congress that Le loi, c'est moi, the law is me. No going to Congress to satisfy the Constitution or the War Powers Act. He decides the law.
Having seen what Obama does, my guess is that once Israel agrees to Obama's formula -- say, accepting a return to 1967 lines as the basis of negotiations, with mutually agreed swaps -- and if, as expected a deadlock arises regarding agreed swaps and any further negotiations come to a stand still, then Obama will say that Israel must return to the 1967 lines or it is in violation of its own promises and therefore in violation of international law. He is collecting international support for doing this to Israel, and he will threaten Israel with international isolation if it does not go to the indefensible 1967 lines. The maximum pressure on Israel from Obama will come during his second term in office, or even right after the November 2012 election, when he is no longer seeking votes or donations, and feels free to do to Israel whatever he likes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)