Against their will, Washington has been cornered by Israel, if not to approve of Israel’s crimes, then to use its power to protect Israel from international condemnation, especially from the U.N. Security Council. Israel has committed the most despicable crimes [against the Palestinian people] since the end of World War II. You can’t say too much, but it is the only country in the world to be vague about its nuclear arsenal, isn’t it? That is its right as a state "outside international norms," as the United States considers it to be.
Israel has constructed a 700-kilometer long separation wall through the Palestinian territories, which has been condemned by the International Court of Justice, but it has the right to defend – says the United States. Through the continuous expansion of colonies, Israel is reconfiguring the Palestinian territories and rendering the creation of two states (Israel and Palestine) that live alongside each other farcical, as Washington advocates. The list is not exhaustive, but is indicative of Israel’s extravagances, the "taboos" that the United States is supposed to respect, and against all logic, even defend – all the while knowing the damage that the Hebrew state inflicts on peace and security in the Middle East by preventing the establishment of two states living in peace. Although, in private, American diplomats criticize the insistence on constructing homes in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem – which are barriers to the peace process – officially, if they are not justifying Israel’s absurd actions, they nevertheless do so while blaming the Palestinians who are not making as many concessions as the United States’ protégé would like.
Indeed, the relationship between the Great World Power and Israel really borders on the inconsistent when the United States either finds something to justify one position, or takes back what it has said, usually about Palestine. A conclusive example is that of United States’ President Barack Hussein Obama, who, during the 2008 presidential campaign, did not have harsh enough words to describe the deplorable conditions in which the Palestinians are expected to live. So we were surprised to report that it was time that a United States presidential candidate had the courage to finally denounce Israel’s folly. Candidate Obama did so, and it was creditable of him, because he then displayed a refreshing insight that we are not used to from the Americans as far as Israel is concerned. Alas! This uprightness, this wisdom lasted no longer than the campaign. Once elected to the White House, and having been well taken in hand by the Zionist lobbies, Mr. Obama made a 360 degree turn becoming an almost ruthless enemy of the Palestinians and going as far as to oppose Palestine’s membership in the U.N, which shows the coercive power of Israel over the United States.
Today, we recall this case in particular, and the Israeli "taboos" in general, thanks to the latest declarations of the democratic candidate for the American presidency, Bernie Sanders. He has jumped in turn into the fray by breaking a taboo in judging “Israel’s response in the 2014 Gaza war to be disproportionate, and calling for a more balanced approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict.” The American press were all stirred up and in turmoil over this, astonished by the thunderous outburst of a candidate whose Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, thought he knew nothing of international diplomacy. However, he has proved that he understands the subject perfectly when he asserts that the United States should treat the Palestinians with “respect and dignity” and that they “can no longer continue to follow a unilateral policy in this conflict.” In a few words, Mr. Sanders has perfectly summarized why there can be no positive developments in the Israeli-Palestinian case. It only remains to know, if by any chance Bernie Sanders were to win the jackpot (the White House), whether he would remain firm in his convictions and work to (finally) make both Israel (of course) and (above all) his own country respect international law. This would be a global revolution, and a return of things to their proper place. But is it possible? According to the polls, if he is faced with the billionaire Donald Trump – who is currently leading in his party’s primaries – Mr. Sanders would crush the Republican contender. Can destiny change? If, notwithstanding the difficulties, he were to be elected, would he not – like his predecessor Barack Obama – be dealt with and twisted like a damp rag in order, in his turn, to be sapped of life and put to Israel’s service? An interesting challenge, which, no doubt will (again) show Israel’s stranglehold on the world’s greatest power.