Maybe it would have been more accurate to say the world against America and Israel. It’s never been more the case in the United Nations. Until the recent UN vote condemning Israel for building settlements on the outskirts of Jerusalem, the United States has reliably used its veto power to strike down resolutions targeting Israel. When you look at the hundreds of resolutions introduced in the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations, you might conclude that the organization exists primarily for the purpose of the continual condemnation of Israel. The vast majority of the resolutions were either to forbid Israel from something it might do, condemn it for something it had done, or to assist the plight of “Palestinian” residents or refugees.
Former president Obama, having snubbed Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu at every turn, scandalously turned America’s back and for the first time ever, allowed the passage of the resolution condemning Israeli settlements as “illegal.” It is interesting that this hadn’t happened, even under the Obama administration, until after the election of Donald Trump. The former president interrupted his Hawaiian vacation to inform Susan Rice (who deceived the world on the Benghazi attacks), who then relayed the order to ambassador Samantha Power who raised her hand in abstention on behalf of the United States at the UN. Even the Washington Post made it clear that the abstention on the part of the United States was a decision taken in light of the fact that Obama would never again have to face the American people in a bid for office. It’s obvious he also knew that neither Hillary Clinton nor his liberal allies in government would have to deal with the consequences.
Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel was furious. He flat-out accused the Obama administration of having conspired with the Palestinians to push the resolution of condemnation against Israel’s settlements. Israeli spokesmen claim to have “iron-clad” intelligence proving that claim. The Israeli Prime Minister himself made the following public remark before his own cabinet, “According to our information, we have no doubt the Obama administration initiated it, stood behind it, coordinated the wording and demanded it be passed.”
Former Secretary of State John Kerry came out to defend the action, saying it was an attempt to “force a two-state solution.” Apparently the EU, the pope and the UN think that peace would break out if only Israel would pull back to pre-1967 borders, giving up the Temple Mount and all of east Jerusalem, and allow the establishment of a “Palestinian” state. Never mind the fact that the “Palestinians” have not succeeded in peacefully governing the territory of Gaza, even though many Jewish settlers were forcefully evicted by their own government in an effort to test the “land for peace” theory.
Of course there’s been no peace. The record is clear. No “Palestinian” leader has been willing to sign his own death warrant by accepting Israel’s right to exist, no matter what the land concessions. Not that Israel is about to cede east Jerusalem as a Palestinian capitol. It wouldn’t begin to be accepted by the Israeli population, though their politics are as varied and contentious as anyplace on earth.
The prospect that terrorist and military attacks could be taken against Israel from within the city of Jerusalem itself is utterly unthinkable and unacceptable to the vast majority of Israelis, whatever their political leanings. Recent reports indicate that the group Hamas, which runs the territory that “Palestinians” occupy in Gaza, has teamed up with ISIS. February 9, 2017 saw reports of four rockets fired from Egyptian territory in the Sinai at the Israeli resort town of Eilat. (Eilat has for many years been a popular destination for European tourists, particularly those from Norway and Sweden.) Israel announced that they’d shot down three of the incoming rockets, while a fourth fell short of the resort town. Egypt has been battling terror activities in the Sinai for years.
We’ve been led to believe that the advent of a Trump presidency means that Israel once again has a staunch and reliable ally in the United States. News reports recently appeared to convey that the new American president was scolding Israel for announcing the construction of additional settlements, saying that they were detrimental to the prospects for peace. However, we’ve learned to wait for clarification before believing any slant put forth by media, mainstream or otherwise.
Prime Minister Netanyahu was an early invitee to visit the White House. President Trump has signaled that he wants to do the impossible, that is to bring the Israelis and Palestinian to conclude a lasting peace arrangement. So it is possible that there may be some disagreements with Israel’s policies or actions that run contrary to that theme. It is however a safe bet that the relationship will be far more congenial than existed under the Obama administration, where every effort was made, even using American taxpayer money to see Prime Minister Netanyahu defeated in the Israeli election last year.
The EU has tried to spit hairs in response to most controversies involving Israel and the Palestinians. The EU has upheld, and encouraged boycotts of Israeli products produced in the “west bank,” territory that the “Palestinians” claim for their future state. From a legal and trade standpoint, Israel is covered by the European Neighborhood Policy, which means that there is an open trading relationship. But the EU has been consistently critical of Israel in every dispute, condemning every Israeli military response to the onslaught of rocket attacks from Lebanon and from Gaza.
The EU Parliament accused Israel of “excessive force,” “disproportionate” military responses, against terrorist forces in Lebanon, and “collective punishment” for its blockade of Gaza. Relations between the EU and Israel are “frozen” according to the incoming president of the EU Parliament, and will remain so until “progress” is made on the peace process.
EU leaders are terrified at the prospects a Trump administration will bring. First they watched in disbelief as Britons voted to leave. There is little doubt that the onslaught of Muslim immigration, having already led to social mayhem in and around London, destroying the formerly carefree atmosphere in cities and neighborhoods all over Europe in addition to the spate of vicious terrorist murders in Paris, Nice, Brussels, in addition to the waves of crime immigrant gangs have brought to Europe’s streets had a lot to do with the outcome of the “Brexit” referendum. Now European leaders see the rise of populist parties around the continent, and worry that other nations will follow suit.
If the European Union should break apart, due to, say France electing Marine Le Pen, or because of the impossible debt load of Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain, it is a safe bet that those individual nations will still unilaterally, or collectively oppose Israel. They can be expected to join any two-state solution called for by the Vatican and the UN.
Whether the revived closeness of the U. S. – Israel relationship will be lasting may well depend on how badly the Trump administration wants to be credited with having achieved the ultimate “deal,” Israel and the Palestinian Arabs living side by side in peace. It’s just not possible.
