In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
Grande Strategy

Obama: Israel First, America Second?

JAFAR SYED on 03 November, 2008 21:22:57 | 6 times read

"You let me have the Jewish vote of New York and I will bring you the head of Ibn Saud on a platter" … Jewish leader Bernard Baruch.

Commitment to Israel is a matter of head and heart for Democratic presidential nominee Obama. He also considers Iran as an urgent priority, opines Dennis Ross who was interviewed by Haaretz on 10.24.08. He alerts the world that nuclear Iran is a threat both to Israel and the United State. As the bond between the U.S. and Israel is considered, Ross views that Israelis and Americans share common values and common interests.

Dennis Ross is a potential contender for secretary of state in the administration of Obama. He served Bill Clinton's envoy to the Middle East and in Senior Bush's administration he held a senior staff position in the state department. At present, he is advisor to Obama on Middle East.

"Ahead of the American elections, Dennis Ross, the man who used to work as President Bill Clinton's envoy to the Middle East, has been busy "working" the shuls in Florida, a key battleground state in the presidential election. Aside from sitting on the boards of many different research institutes, Ross also acts as Democratic candidate Barack Obama's Middle East advisor. In addition, he is a leading contender - among some 300 candidates - for the post of secretary of state in an Obama government." (Natasha Mozgovaya, Dennis Ross on why he's working for Obama and how he'd talk to Iran, Haaretz, 10.24.08)

In the interview, Ross mentions three top priorities of Jewish leadership and Obama's commitment to these priorities. According to Dennis Ross, Jewish leadership wants to know that how president Obama will deal with "nuclear Iran" and how he will handle the peace process. Besides these two issues, Dennis Ross states that Jewish leadership also wants to know that what will be the nature of relationship between Israel and Obama administration.

In his interview, Ross grilled President Bush for allowing Iran to become "nuclear."

"With regard to the Iranians, we know that by not talking to Iran the U.S. did not improve the situation. Today Iran is a nuclear power - it doesn't have nuclear weapons yet, but in 2001 it was not yet able to convert uranium or uranium gas, it didn't have a single centrifuge. Now it's stockpiling highly enriched uranium. So the current approach of not talking hasn't worked." (Natasha Mozgovaya Dennis Ross on why he's working for Obama and how he'd talk to Iran, Haaretz, 10.24.08)

Ross dress downs the Bush administration on another front. It is the rise of Hamas. 

The Bush administration wanted to disengage for its first six years in office. [By doing so] they actually strengthened Hamas' hand, because Hamas' argument is [that] there is no possibility for peace. The least you want to do is show that there could be an alternative answer."  (Natasha Mozgovaya,  Dennis Ross on why he's working for Obama and how he'd talk to Iran, Haaretz, 10.24.08)

How will President Obama succeed where Bush administration failed on the issue of nuclear Iran and rise of Hamas? Advisor to Obama has an answer to these questions.

Obama's willingness to talk with Iran is a strategy for denuclearizing Iran, claims Dennis Ross.

"In the first instance, [Obama] views the issue of Iran as an urgent priority, because the Bush administration's approach to Iran has failed. I talk about how Obama wants to use our willingness to talk as a means to get others to actually apply more pressure on the Iranians, as a way to ensure the talks' success, but also because the talks themselves send a signal [to] those who fear [that] applying more pressure means you're descending toward a slippery slope of confrontation. This is a way of saying, Look, we're trying to see if there's a way to avoid that. Preventing Iran from going nuclear is a very high priority for him, not only because it's such a threat to Israel, but because it's such a threat to the United States. " (Natasha Mozgovaya,  Dennis Ross on why he's working for Obama and how he'd talk to Iran, Haaretz, 10.24.08)

Obama administration will apply the strategy of "engagement without illusion" to cripple Hamas.   

"Regarding the peace process, I think this is an issue where engagement is also crucial, but, much like Iran, it is an engagement without illusions. When you engage, you do so without illusions. But when you don't engage, you leave the way open for your adversaries to actually gain more.

What kind of engagement might it be? The Israeli government isn't fond of being under pressure, and some people are very sensitive about the idea of talking to Iran, especially since the Iranian leadership is saying nasty things about Israel.

"Sure, that's why I started by saying that it's an engagement without illusions. (Natasha Mozgovaya,  Dennis Ross on why he's working for Obama and how he'd talk to Iran, Haaretz, 10.24.08)

Dennis Ross, advisor to Obama, assures the Jews that Obama commitment to Israel is rock-solid.  U.S. – Israel relations are one of the top priorities according to Ross interview published in Haaretz.

"On the question of Israel, I talk about what I saw during his trip to Israel, how I saw his understanding of the relationship with Israel - he would describe it as a commitment of the head and heart. He looks at Israel and sees us as being two countries with common values. But he also looks at Israel and sees that whatever threatens Israel also happens to threaten the United States. So we have a [common] interest, because we end up facing the same threats."  (Natasha Mozgovaya,  Dennis Ross on why he's working for Obama and how he'd talk to Iran, Haaretz, 10.24.08)

And Dennis Ross is right. Senator Obama commitment to Israel is unshakeable. View this commitment in Obama's words.

"Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us. Israel has always faced these threats on the front lines. And I will bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security.

"That starts with ensuring Israel's qualitative military advantage. I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat - from Gaza to Tehran. Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and must be deepened. As President, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade - investments to Israel's security that will not be tied to any other nation. First, we must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. Going forward, we can enhance our cooperation on missile defense. We should export military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO. And I will always stand up for Israel's right to defend itself in the United Nations and around the world." (Obama's remarks to AIPAC policy conference, Jewish World Review June 5, 2008)

For Obama, Jewish occupation of Muslim Palestine is Just and necessary.

"It was just a few years after the liberation of the camps that David Ben-Gurion declared the founding of the Jewish State of Israel. We know that the establishment of Israel was just and necessary, rooted in centuries of struggle, and decades of patient work." (Obama's remarks to AIPAC policy conference, Jewish World Review June 5, 2008)

Why does every president from George Washington to Baby Bush try to serve the illegitimate interests of the Jewish leadership? The reason is obvious. Jewish lobby has the ability to turn into a political corpse those who do not toe its agenda. The destructive power of Jewish lobby was confessed by Jewish leader Bernard Baruch.

"The only thing which will matter in Washington … is if the people in the Bronx ad Brownsville and Borough Park begin to mutter in their breads, they'll demned if they continue to cast their votes to a party that breaks its pledges to them … You let me have the Jewish vote of New York and I will bring you the head of Ibn Saud on a platter! The Administration will sell all seven Arab states if it is a question of retaining the support … of the Jews of New York alone; never mind the rest of the country. (Peter Grose, Israel in the Mind of America, P. 175)

Jewish leadership priorities in the coming election are the same as they were in the presidency of President Wilson.  First step was to establish a Jewish state in the heart of the Muslim World.  It was President Wilson who endorsed the Balfore Declaration. It was President Roosevelt who planned the ethnic cleansing.  It was President Truman who recognized the Jewish state.

After the establishment of Jewish state, the next step was and is to maintain the Jewish state. And every president became the protector of the Jewish state since the establishment of Jewish state in 1948.

Creation and maintenance of Jewish state cost Americans a lot financially and politically. But the American leadership opted to fulfill Jewish leadership's agenda on the expanse of America's national interest. By doing so they betrayed their own county and Americans.  They opted for this treacherous course because they could not survive politically.

Jewish leadership controls the media and uses it as a lethal weapon. Occupation of Palestine by the European Jews is justified by the Jewish control media in the United States and beyond. Anti-occupation Muslim forces are painted as anti-peace and rejectionists. Declassified documents show that Muslim leadership was coerced by the United State and as a result of this coercion they surrendered on every issue. By doing so, they were sacrificing their own brothers, Palestinians. They were ready to accept a unitary state, a federal state, a cantonized state or a trusteeship for Palestine. In other words, they were legitimizing the European Jewish occupation.

 

"Conversation on the Palestine Question with several of the principle Arab Delegates to the United Nations, including Faris Bey el Khouri (Syria), Camille Chamoun (Lebanon), Charles Malik (Lebanon) and Fawzi Bey (Egypt), during the past days have revealed certain important points which indicate that insofar as the Arab states are concerned they would be willing to suggest possible solution to the Palestine Question which in the judgment of Mr. Wilkins and myself go further than any previous position taken by the Arab states. It now appears that the Arab states, and as a result the Arab Higher Committee, might be willing to agree to one the following solutions which incorporated the following features:

"1. A unitary state with

(a)  a democratic constitution and government;

(b)  explicit guarantees regarding minority rights and privileges;

(c)   a bicameral legislature in which the Jewish population would have equal representation in a Senate;

(d)  municipal autonomy for various towns or districts;

(e)   immigration of Jews up to 100,000 over a two or three  year period and a lesser number each year thereafter

(f)    a United Nations commission to observe developments of the Palestine situation

"2. A Federal or canonized state with  

(a)  a democratic constitution and government;

(b)  explicit guarantees regarding minority rights and privileges;

(c)   a bicameral legislature in which the Jewish population would have equal representation in a Senate;

(d)  states or cantons similar to the constitutional organization of the United States or Switzerland;

(e)   immigration of Jews up to 100,000 over a two or three year period and a lesser number each year thereafter;

(f)    a United Nations commission to observe development of the Palestine situation.

"3. Trusteeship with

(a)  terms of reference giving more responsibility for self-government than present time;

(b)  immigration features similar to those set forth in the preceding two paragraphs.

"Thus it will be noted that the Arab states would now be willing to go further than they ever have before on the subjects of

(a)  constitutional organization,

(b)  immigration, and

(c)   Guarantees for minorities. (Top secret, Momorandum by Mr. Samuel K.C. Kopper to the United States Representative at the United States" (Austin), U.S. Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume 5, P. 721-722)

In other words, Arab leadership was ready to live with the occupier of Palestine, European Jews. They were also ready to give the occupier equal rights and international guarantees. But this offer was not acceptable to the Jewish leadership. It knew that the Muslim leadership would not accept the partition plan and rejection of Partition Plan would give them a justification to occupy the entire Palestine. American leadership was a partner in this heinous plan.

As Obama's presidency is concerned, it will be worst for the Muslims. His commitment to Jewish cause did not start today. It goes back to his childhood.

(Jafar Syed is a researcher in International Affairs, based in New York)


Vision Without Glasses

0 comments:

Post a Comment