The veto the U.S. imposed on condemning construction in the settlements can be recorded as an achievement of Israeli policy. Over a long period, heavy concerns could be heard that during Barack Obama’s tenure in the White House, the protective belt America has been granting to Israel for many years would collapse.
This pessimistic forecast has not come true in the first test of the vote in the Security Council. The result is positive. Especially since Washington did so in the full swing of the earthquake befalling Arab countries – and where it played a key role, for the most part, in the Egyptian drama.
It’s only that, on the flipside, there emerge warning signs and questions necessitating a thorough inquiry. There is no certainty about how many times America will be willing to exercise the veto in the future; what is certain is that it will charge Israel dearly in return for its readiness to encounter a non-splendid political isolation. In the past, there were also some of the Western countries supporting the United States. The day before yesterday, they abandoned it. One way or another, Obama imposed the veto like someone under compulsion. The political receipt will arrive.
Political Tsunami on the Horizon
This isolation also indicates that the U.S. not only worked to undermine friendly regimes in the last month but also that its status has grown weaker. The Americans have done their best to persuade the Palestinians to moderate and restrain the formulation of the resolution in order to not be forced to drop out of the public — i.e. out of the company of the rest of the 14 member countries in the Security Council – but Abu Mazen rejected them. There is thus no escape from the conclusion that the status of the U.S. is in decline. Even the Palestinian Authority does not fear to flout it in spite of its great dependence on this regime.
The disturbing weakening of the U.S. only speaks to part of a problem. It looks like the tier above is that the Palestinians have decided to quit the negotiations with Israel. They aren’t interested in a “give and take.” When the entire world, except for the U.S., is standing by their side, they enjoy the tailwind that’s aimed at getting an international resolution in favor of establishing Palestine without discussing with Israel the terms of its foundation. Even if Abu Mazen is still interested in a Palestine that’s side by side with Israel.
The vote in the Security Council testifies that Abu Mazen doesn’t care for the negotiations anymore; that he’s positive that even if he slowly makes it out from arbitration with Israel, he won’t lose the support of the frightened and embarrassed West; and that, given this, the seven-minister forum* also needs to convene — just like in the government’s first days — and clarify with itself what the price list is that Israel is interested in, wants or can stand.
The vote is good for Israel, but a political tsunami is unfolding on the horizon.
* Translator’s Note: This forum is comprised of top seven Israeli ministers: four hawkish right-wing members and three who are more moderate.
Israel’s real threat lies in its bid to become a profane state which is a clear contradiction of Judaism. It is recalled that Ben-Gurion snubbed Rabbis and replaced allegiance to God at the swearing in ceremony with allegiance to a symbolic “Rock of Israel.” “God,” said Ben-Gurion, “did not do enough to deserve this credit.” Furthermore read Ben-Gurion’s this statement:” If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti – Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”
What sort of peace does a false and illegitimate Jewish state expects in this context?