The recent flap about Israel supposedly insulting the United States by announcing plans to build 1,600 new housing units within the sovereign territory of Israel is remarkable on many levels. First, it’s a non-story. There is nothing new about Israel developing new housing in East Jerusalem, for Israel has never pledged not to do so.

Second, despite the Obama administration’s repeated assurances that it will continue to stand behind America’s only reliable ally in the middle east, comments by key administration officials make it clear that our commitment to Israel is now conditional on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “good behavior.”

Finally, this incident signals a clear shift in American policy. Under Barack Obama, the United States now officially accepts that there is a justifiable link between jihadist attacks on the United States and Israeli behavior.

Was2345642

Yet, to hear the tired old mainstream media tell the story, Israel is completely out of control, deliberately antagonizing the United States of America. Consider this lead from CNN:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called it insulting to the United States earlier this month that the Jewish state announced new construction on disputed land while Vice President Joe Biden was visiting. Not only did the Israeli declaration seem designed to torpedo indirect peace talks with the Palestinians, which the United States had just painstakingly arranged, but it came during a trip by the highest-ranking member of the Obama administration yet to visit the country.

Or this one, from ABC White House correspondent Jake Tapper:

The President’s top adviser David Axelrod told me that approval of new housing units by Israel in the Arab section of Jerusalem during Vice President Biden’s trip there last week was an “affront” and an “insult.” “What it did was it made more difficult a very difficult process,” Axelrod said in my “This Week” interview.  Axelrod added that the move “seemed calculated to undermine” the so-called proximity talks going on between the Palestinians and the Israelis.”

It is important to note that when Netanyahu pledged his nation to a ten-month moratorium on building new settlements, Jerusalem was specifically exempted from the promise, a position that reflects Israel’s policy for decades. If the Obama administration appeared shocked by Israel’s announcement to build new homes, ignorance or gamesmanship are the only possible excuses.

jerusalem

Amazingly, the MSM not only built a mountain out of this particular molehill, they continued to push the myth that if Israel just makes one more concession, peace will magically break out in the middle east. Remember that when Israel ceded its authority over the Gaza strip in 2005, everything was supposed to get better. That’s not what happened. Rather than being placated, Hamas predictably became more emboldened and regional violence grew progressively worse.

Under Barack Obama’s neo-appeasement version of foreign policy, no nation is supposed to say or do anything that can offend another nation and, should two nations are find themselves at cross purposes, then the nation with the most Muslims – aka: the most aggrieved nation – wins. Obama presumes that violent extremists can be talked off their violent, extremist ledges through kind words and generous concessions. For Obama, if our allies aren’t willing to appease in kind, they must suffer the consequences. Yet, pointing out this rather obvious truth is sure to earn a sneer from the president’s cheerleaders in the MSM, for doing so makes Obama sound rather weak and morally mushy.

Remember when Obama offered to sit down with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to work out our “understandable” differences? Recently, Associated Press reporter Tom Raum seemed to be suffering from short-term memory loss while referring to Obama’s “…comments during the presidential campaign suggesting a willingness to meet with the leader of Iran.” “Suggesting a willingness” to meet with Ahmadinejad? “Affirming” would be my verb of choice, but then I don’t write for AP:


Obama and his handlers know that directly throwing Israel under the bus won’t do. The American people, by and large, understand that Israel matters, both in terms of our national security and in terms of our moral obligations. Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and even Axelrod dutifully paid lip-service to Israel and the special nature of the American-Israeli alliance. But, that’s all it was: lip-service. Obama expects Israel to toe the line and accept his vision of a new world order.  Bibi Netanyahu, strongly backed by the country he leads, isn’t going to entrust the future of Israel to a “visionary” like Obama who can’t stomach American exceptionalism, much less Israel’s pugnacious sense of self-preservation.

It says a great deal about the current state of our affairs when the pre-eminent leader defending western, democratic institutions in 2010 does not reside in either Washington D.C. or London, England, but in Tel Aviv. Today, Bibi Netanyahu is de facto, if not de jure, leading the defense of the west. Yet, all Barack Obama seems able to worry about is how many homes Bibi might build within the nation he lawfully governs.