The Obama administration is signaling that, against the backdrop of genocidal rhetoric and faced with an existential threat from Iran, Israel cannot count on the United States. There is no greater sign than the wavering U.S. commitment to the Jewish state than the Obama administration’s decision to scale down considerably a forthcoming joint military exercise.
Obama may wish to express his displeasure with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but he should realize that it can encourage war when enemies believe U.S. commitments to American allies are shakable. Here, the genesis of the Korean war should provide an important lesson. On January 12, 1950, Secretary of State Dean Acheson gave a speech in which he laid out U.S. interests in Asia:
In the first place, the defeat and the disarmament of Japan has placed upon the United States the necessity of assuming the military defense of Japan so long as that is required, both in the interest of our security and in the interests of the security of the entire Pacific area… The defensive perimeter runs along the Aleutians to Japan and then goes to the Ryukyus. We hold important defense positions in the Ryukyu Islands, and those we will continue to hold… The defensive perimeter runs from the Ryukyus to the Philippine Islands. Our relations, our defensive relations with the Philippines are contained in agreements between us. Those agreements are being loyally carried out and will be loyally carried out… So far as the military security of other areas in the Pacific is concerned, it must be clear that no person can guarantee these areas against military attack. But it must also be clear that such a guarantee is hardly sensible or necessary within the realm of practical relationship.
Acheson continued to advise those states not covered by the defensive perimeter to resist on their own or rely on the United Nations. “It is a mistake, I think, in considering Pacific and Far Eastern problems to become obsessed with military considerations,” he explained.
Kim Il Sung heard Acheson’s speech and interpreted his omission of South Korea (and Taiwan) from the defense perimeter as a green light to attack South Korea six months later. Had the Truman administration signaled an unshakable commitment to South Korea, it might have impacted Kim’s thinking.
Obama may not like Netanyahu, but by amplifying his antipathy into symbolic chastisement of Israel, the president may be impacting Iranian thinking in ways that will be very costly to the United States (not to mention Israel) and impossible to reverse.
How many of history's lessons has this administration ignored? Such malfeasance stems from the HISTORY BEGAN WITH ME! attitude that Obama has displayed since his first day in office. In his view, why should a transformative figure such as he bother with the tired old bromides of the past?
This would be more persuasive if there were a link to the information about downgrading the military exercise. The tale of Acheson and the island chain defense perimeter is an oft-told tale, the downgraded exercise new information.
Whatever happened to 'We've got Israel's back.'? n nShame on Israel for believing the moron in the White House saw Iran as any sort of immediate concern. He has been running away form the mid east in everything he has done. n n'Iran is the world's problem', 'Iran is American's problem', they bleated over and over, to deaf ears, while issuing hollow threat and blustering continuously for the last 8 years. n nNow, Iran has burrowed ever deeper underground, and Obama has seized the moment to cut Israel loose. n nIsrael is in a tough spot. She can rearrange the whole mideast in her favor, come ourt as something more than a regional power, lose her vassal status, regain her deterrence, and, likely, help bounce Obama out of office with a successful strike against Iran done while The One sat on his hands. n nThe downside risk is hard to foresee from here. n n
Except from all reports only Bibi and Ehud feel existential urgency and they themselves haven't translated talk into actions or called for a vote of the inner cabinet on a military option. And the list of intelligence and military chiefs, sitting and former, who advise against an attack and seem inclined to live with the Iranian threat for another year or so argues that many in Israel don't care if Obama has Israel's back because they don't see Iran as an existential threat–whether because they believe that Iran will take longer to close the deal on their nukes or whether they believe that ultimately Israel's own nukes will deter them. n nThis old pooch doesn't get it, but they're on record.
Have you done an informal analysis of whether the pros vs cons fall along party lines?
It's really hard to fathom what Obama is doing (or meaning). I know he claims to be a Christian (and is maybe likely at best an agnostic) — but his policies sure seem to respect Muslim and sharia principles and goals. It truly seems like his whole plan for 3+ years was to get Israel to delay defending itself until such time as Israel's Muslim enemies would be too strong for Israel to defend herself against??? But how could that be — that any American leader would work with the enemies of our allies to destroy our allies? n nAt some point Israel is going to have to act — but there is a lot of danger in that (especially if Obama stands by and watches what seems to be the intent of his foreign policy come to fruition). It isn't clear Israel can accomplish their purpose, even to delay Iran's nuclear program, although retaliation from Iran would likely be slow enough for Israel to defend. The danger is in Israel being attacked from 3 sides by thousands of missiles and possibly invasion (only able to hope that none of the other enemies of Israel is such a good friend of Iran that they force Israel to fight on too many fronts) — except, of course, none of those threats would be a problem if Israel was America's ally!
If that report is true, then…wow…just wow, that is truly an insane and reckless position for us to take. n nI'm not Jewish, so I don't have the same emotional tie to Israel that many do here, but reading that piece, I just can't understand how any Jew who cares about Israel could support Obama.