Historical Implications of Failing to be Israel's Friend
Reader comment on item: Obama and Netanyahu Meet: What's Next?

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Jun 3, 2009 at 12:17

In retrospect, we find it is interesting that Prime Minister Netanyahu went to the United States for his meeting with the American president (to be told his stance on Israeli sovereignty was no longer in the best interests of the 'Road Map to Peace'); but Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak meets the American president on home soil to extol the supposed virtues of supporting the 'Palestinian' cause over the Israeli one. Not too much might be made from that except, that there appears to be a strengthening of the resolve to dislodge Israel from any previous understanding about her place in the Middle East, and the greatest effort in attempting to accomplish that now comes from the American administration.

Arab interests in the lands of Israeli possession are seeing a shift to their position from the current American administration, due to a decidedly leftist mindset that has apparently aligned itself more closely with the radical Islamic intention to deprive Israel of any security in its own land. There are indications that similar thinking comes from within the liberal ranks of the Israeli government as well, such as Kadima, and it does not bode well for the new direction of Prime Minister Netanyahu's administration.

As the evidence builds in demonstrating the current American administration's antipathy (at one time more subliminal, even diffident, during earlier more friendly relations with Israel-now openly confrontational), it will be more easily seen that the new resolve being out into the minds of the 'Palestinian' administration comes from a burgeoning recklessness to gain peace at Israel's expense, irrespective of its cost to the Israeli's, and even the American people.

It remains to be seen what implications, and or repercussions, may result from the anticipated speech of the American president from Cairo. It is not likely to generate any new good will towards Israel, which under the circumstances, should not be expected. Yet, there will be a confirmation of the shift by the liberal left away from supporting Israel. In this will be seen the reasons for greater pressure on Israel to concede to the American administration's position for eliminating development on land erroneously thought to be 'Palestinian.'

On the other side is the situation that Israel is truly in no position to make any such concessions, for in doing so puts Israel in a greater place of danger. That being the case, it would seem that the 'Palestinian' radical factions may get their intense desire granted, to go to unrestrained warfare and try to eliminate Israel altogether. The only problem with that is the promise of Israel's Almighty God to keep her in the land. In the final analysis, forgetting that holy promise will be the undoing of the current American administration's stance on Israel, for who can go against a Holy Almighty God and win? History is littered with the remains (Phoenicians, Philistines, Egyptians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Muslims, Germans, etc.) of those who have tried, and failed.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.