Britannia Radio

Isi Leibler   Isi Leibler  November 18, 2010
	Homepage   |   Israel   |   Diaspora Jewry   |   Antisemitism   |   International Affairs   |   Judaism
	Harper and Obama on Israel by Isi Leibler November 18, 2010 http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=2571    Having recently visited the US and Canada, I was left with a feeling of profound disquiet  concerning the starkly contrasting attitudes toward Israel displayed by the leaders of these  two neighboring countries. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has unquestionably emerged as Israel's greatest friend in  the world, effectively assuming the role previously occupied by former Australian prime  minister John Howard. Harper's principled approach to Israel was demonstrated in an extraordinary address he  gave in Ottawa to an interparliamentary conference for combating anti-Semitism. Courageously  dismissing the traditional political correctness expressed by many liberals, who feel obliged to  distance themselves from the Jewish state, Harper made it clear that under his leadership  Canada would not "pretend" to be impartial on Israel even if that meant facing negative  repercussions at the UN and other international organizations. He said that the persecution of Jews had become a global phenomenon in which  anti-Semitic ideologies targeted the Jewish people in their "homeland" and perversely  exploited the "language of human rights to do so." He stressed that "while Israel is the  only country in the world under attack, is consistently and conspicuously singled out for  condemnation, I believe we are morally obligated to take a stand. "I know this because I have the bruises to show for it, that whether it is at the UN or  any other international forum, the correct thing to do is simply to just go along with this  anti-Israeli rhetoric, to pretend it is just about being evenhanded, and to excuse oneself  with the label of ‘honest broker'... There are after all, a lot more votes in being anti- Israel  than taking a stand. "But as long as I am prime minister, whether it is at the UN or anywhere else, Canada will  take that stand, whatever the cost. Not just because it is the right thing to do but because  history shows us that the ideology of the anti-Israeli mob tells us all too well, that those  who threaten the existence of the Jewish people are a threat to us all." Canada was in fact "punished" for its support of Israel when it was ignominiously  defeated by Portugal, an almost bankrupt country,  in its attempt to obtain a seat at the UN Security Council. All 57 seats of the Organization  of the Islamic Conference opposed the Canadian nomination. For some, Canada's defeat under such circumstances will be viewed as a badge of honor.  But what made Canada's defeat even more outrageous was the role of the US. According  to Richard Grenfell, a former press officer with the US mission to the UN, "US State  Department insiders say that US Ambassador Susan Rice not only didn't campaign for  Canada's election but instructed American diplomats to not get involved in the weekend  leading up to the heated contest." David Frum, a speechwriter to former president George W. Bush, also noted that "the  US government has kept awfully quite about the suggestion that it went missing during  the Security Council vote." The US betrayal of its neighbor and long-standing ally is a chilling indication of the depths  to which the Obama administration has stooped in its efforts to "engage" and appease  Islamic and Third World rogue states. Having joined the appallingly misnamed UN Human Rights Council dominated by  dictatorships and Islamic nations, the US is now beginning to reap the harvest from this  flawed policy. This was exemplified this month during the council's first "universal periodic  review of human rights." In a session where US representative Esther Brimmer told the group  that "it is an honor to be in the chamber ," Cuba described the US blockade of Cuba as a "crime of genocide"; Iran, a country which  stones women for adultery, urged the US "to combat violence against women"; and Libya  complained about US "racism, racial discrimination and intolerance." IN THE midst of this and despite repeated assurances concerning the "unbreakable bond of  friendship" between the US and Israel, Obama is continuing to flex his muscles by beating  up on Israel. Yet, his Middle East policies, which run counter to American public  opinion, have failed disastrously, with US approval levels in the Muslim world even plummeting  below 2008 levels. Obama's most recent assault on Israel was conveyed from his childhood home, Jakarta, the  capital of Indonesia, the largest Islamic country in the world, which he praised as a model  of tolerance worthy of global emulation. While compared to Arab standards, Islamic Indonesia may be relatively tolerant, the  president overlooked the recent opinion polls, in which25 percent of the population  expressed confidence in the leadership of Osama bin Laden, and that between 2004  and 2007, 110 Christian churches were closed due to pressure from local governments.  In January of this year, 1,000 Muslims burned down two churches in Sumatra. Needless to say, Indonesia does not recognize Israel, bans Israeli aircraft from flying over  Indonesian territory and denies entry visas to Israeli citizens. It is especially galling that  from such a country, Obama again saw fit to distance the US from Israel and aggressively  condemn the Jewish state for building homes in the exclusively Jewish suburbs of its capital  Jerusalem. We must ask ourselves what endgame the US administration is pursuing. Obama knows that  former prime ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert offered the Palestinians everything  and that they still refused to reach an accommodation because their ultimate objective  emains the delegitimization of Jewish sovereignty. What they now seek is a non-demilitarized  state based on the 1949 armistice lines to provide them or other Arab states with a launching  pad to attack and destabilize Israel.  Not surprisingly, the Europeans are more than happy to accept such a state of affairs.  It would thus be catastrophic for the Obama administration to stand aside and enable this  process to eventuate. Yet, all indicators suggest that the Obama administration is determined to capitalize on  Israel's international vulnerability. Despite the absence of any response from the Palestinians  or the Arab world to Israel's 10-month settlement freeze, the US has literally bludgeoned  Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to breach his undertaking to the people of Israel and  renew a settlement freeze, including areas that will undoubtedly remain in Israel. Although on the surface the US appears to be offering incentives to Israel to persuade it to  accede to its requests, anyone reading between the lines recognizes that nothing new is being  offered. The exercise of the veto in the face of UN resolutions demonizing Israel and offering  to maintain Israel's security needs have been fundamental tenets of the relationship between  Israel and the US. In reality, Obama issued an  ultimatum to Netanyahu by threatening to abandon Israel unless it capitulates to his demands. Many of us today yearn for an American president who would be more considerate of our  needs than the present incumbent. It would perhaps be an impossible dream to have someone  of the caliber of Stephen Harper leading the US, but alas, today, we are becoming increasingly  reconciled to the reality that the US president is no friend of Israel and is paving the way  for an imposed settlement with potentially disastrous long-term repercussions on the security  of our nation. ileibler@netvision.net.il This column was originally published in the Jerusalem Post