Folly and Illegitimacy

In what is becoming an increasing common occurrence, the Obama administration has thrown another staunch ally under the bus, at least half-way. When the Palestinian Authority approached its friends at the U.N. with a resolution making Israel’s apartment construction in Jerusalem and housing development in Hebron “illegal,” the Obama administration vetoed it. So far, so good.

But the story doesn’t end there, although you’d think so given the lack of coverage in the MSM. Immediately following the U.N vote, something else happened.

William Jacobson reports:

… the U.S. was all too happy to sign onto a Presidential Statement from the President of the Security Council denouncing the "illegitimacy" of Israeli settlements. This proposed compromise was rejected by Abbas, despite a phone call from Obama. The U.S. was willing to throw Israel under the bus, but not all the way; throwing our friends only half-way under the bus is what passes for standing by our friends these days.

But it was far worse. The statement made by [U.N. Ambassador] Susan Rice immediately after the vote was outrageously one-sided, the type of pandering to the worst elements in the world which has become a pattern for Obama's foreign policy:

Our opposition to the resolution before this Council today should therefore not be misunderstood to mean we support settlement activity. On the contrary, we reject in the strongest terms the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity. For more than four decades, Israeli settlement activity in territories occupied in 1967 has undermined Israel’s security and corroded hopes for peace and stability in the region. Continued settlement activity violates Israel’s international commitments, devastates trust between the parties, and threatens the prospects for peace…

While we agree with our fellow Council members—and indeed, with the wider world—about the folly and illegitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, we think it unwise for this Council to attempt to resolve the core issues that divide Israelis and Palestinians. We therefore regrettably have opposed this draft resolution.

In the telescopic view of the Obama administration, more than 60 years of Arab rejectionism means nothing.

The rejection of the 1947 U.N. partition plan never happened; the war to drive the Jews into the sea never happened; the terrorist attacks on Israel prior to 1967 never happened; the rejection of multiple attempts at territorial compromise during the Clinton administration never happened; the deliberate launch of "intifadas" after Israel proposed compromise never happened; Hamas in Gaza never happened; dozens of suicide bombings killing hundreds of Israelis never happened; continued anti-Semitic propaganda throughout the Palestinian territories never happened; and I could go on and on.

No, the only thing the Obama administration deemed worthy of condemning in Amb. Rice's statement was Israeli settlement activity.

Why didn’t Rice also condemn the near continuous violence directed by the Palestinians toward the Israelis or the virulently anti-Semitic culture that pervades Gaza and the West Bank, or the rampant corruption that keeps Palestinians in poverty? Nah, she’s against building apartments and houses in Israel ... all the other stuff—no matter.

Those of us who warned that Barack Obama would be the first President in history to take a decidedly anti-Israel tone were dismissed by the President’s adoring supporters. When Susan Rice presented a blatantly anti-Israel position, she tried to mask it with faux concern for Israel, using the tired meme that building houses and apartments “has undermined Israel’s security.” Oh yeah, the Obama administration is so, so concerned about Israel's future. It's positively heartwarming.

I have to wonder whether the President's shrinking number of supporters in the Jewish community will blithely disregard Rices' outrageous statements or whether they'll come to recognize that her words are representative of the President’s feckless attempts at foreign policy.