A Perilous New Year for Israel
Arutz Sheva reported Sunday, “The president’s refusal to meet Netanyahu during the prime minister’s visit to New York next week was officially ascribed to ‘scheduling’ problems. It would be the first time ever that an American president has not met with a visiting Israeli prime minister.” History is being made—not the kind that Israel appreciates, however.
While in the United States, the Israeli prime minister will also be on a campaign to hopefully galvanize American support for more decisive action against Iran. Whether or not Israel will opt for a unilateral strike against Iran without America’s support is the big question, as Israeli officials continue to warn that time is running out in the race to stop Iran from going nuclear.
Israeli officials have made it clear that they will act with or without American support, if it is deemed necessary to protect their country. But with Hezbollah to the north and Hamas and an increasingly unfriendly Egypt to the south, the odds seem stacked against Israel. Any strike on Iran could spark an outbreak of violence against Israel from virtually all sides.
“Appalling as these consequences might be, however, a nuclear-armed Iran, arguably the most significant terrorist state in the world and which regularly issues threats to annihilate Israel, would be a far worse prospect,” Melanie Phillips wrote. “If America were to join such an attack, however, the terrible risks to Israel would be lessened and the likelihood of destroying Iran’s nuclear program significantly higher” (September 11).
For such a small, isolated and endlessly persecuted country, it is easy to see why Israel earnestly desires American support. Its once best and strongest ally could change the whole situation if it decided to step into the fray.
But, “after Israel had all but said it would refrain from attacking Iran’s nuclear plants if only the president would draw a ‘red line’ in negotiations by threatening force if they failed, Obama had refused on the risible grounds that, according to Hillary Clinton, negotiations were ‘the best approach,’” Melanie Phillips continued.
In response, Netanyahu made a rather pointed speech aimed at the United States’ refusal to draw those red lines.
“The world tells Israel, ‘Wait. There’s still time,’” Netanyahu said last Tuesday. “And I say: ‘Wait for what? Wait until when?’ Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel.”
The prime minister went on to say: “If Iran knows that there is no deadline, what will it do? Exactly what it’s doing. It’s continuing, without any interference, towards obtaining nuclear weapons capability and from there, nuclear bombs.”
This unprecedented harsh criticism against the United States is likely what sparked Obama’s “scheduling conflict” that might prevent him from meeting with Netanyahu.
After Netanyahu’s shot at Washington in that manner, U.S. Department of State spokeswoman Victoria Nuland retorted that such public spats between the two nations weren’t helpful in solving the Iranian problem. But as Melanie Phillips pointed out, there could hardly be a more public snub than Obama’s refusal to meet with Netanyahu.
This snub is especially strong considering that President Obama is more than happy to host other leaders like Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, right there in the White House. Now, there is some chance that he will put that off in light of all the problems that we see exploding in the Middle East. But still, what a stark difference between this traditional ally in Israel and some of the others that the White House is quite happy to host.
“Not since its birth six decades ago has Israel been so cast adrift by its closest ally,” Charles Krauthammer wrote for the Washington Post last Friday.
“The Obama policy is a double game: a rhetorical commitment to stopping Iran, yet real-life actions that everyone understands will allow Iran to go nuclear,” he wrote. “Yet at the same time that it does nothing, the administration warns Israel sternly, repeatedly, publicly, even threateningly not to strike the Iranian nuclear program. With zero prospect of his policy succeeding, Obama insists on Israeli inaction, even as Iran races to close the window of opportunity for any successful attack.”
