Tag Archives: foreign policy

Pivoting to Asia

Posted on by
Reply

But on our heels, not our toes….

Last month, Commander US Pacific Command Admiral Samuel Locklear talked about the People’s Republic of China’s action of sending along a spy ship to shadow a RIMPAC exercise (to which the PRC also had sent four combatant ships at RIMPAC’s invitation to participate. Among other things, Locklear thought the spy ship’s appearance was good news.

It’s a recognition, I think, of acceptance by the Chinese that what we’ve been saying to them for some time is that military operations and survey operations in another country’s [maritime zones] are within international law and are acceptable.

As AEIdeas‘ Michael Auslin put it in that linked-to article, though,

…it is a far greater admission that Beijing views the United States with precisely the deep and enduring distrust that America’s senior military leaders have hoped to dispel….

Because, pivot.

UN Gaza Facilities and the Line of Fire

Posted on by
Reply

UNRWA says another of its schools has been hit by Israeli fire.

UNRWA has been caught three times storing Palestinian Authority rockets in their facilities, “unused” or occupied by refugees, for later use in terror attacks on Israel. On one of those occasions, UNRWA carefully turned the cache over to the PA, and on another occasion, UNRWA authorities simply abandoned the facility and the refugees they were pretending to shelter. UNRWA’s disposition of the third collection of stored terror weapons is unknown.

On another occasion, a terrorist tunnel was discovered beneath a UNRWA facility.

The Palestinian Authority also is well known for firing its rockets from UN facilities as well as from private homes of Gazan civilians. The Palestinian Authority’s terrorists are well known for shooting at the IDF from within UN facilities, Gazan hospitals, Gazan private homes.

I have to ask. What weapons were you storing in this “school?” How many terrorists were in this “school” shooting at the IDF at the time of the Israeli fire?

I have to ask another: President Barack Obama, through his State Department condemned the attack.  Where is his condemnation of the Palestinian Authority and their terror war that created the conditions for this attack?

Equal Outcomes

Posted on by
Reply

Because, moral equivalence.

Navi Pillay, outgoing (her six-year term is up) UN High Commissioner for Human Rights had this to say the other day:

[B]y putting and firing rockets within both heavily populated areas both sides were violating international law and therefore committing war crimes.

“Locating rockets within schools and hospitals, or even launching these rockets from densely populated areas are violations of international humanitarian law,” said Ms. Pillay, referring to Hamas, but added that doesn’t “absolve” Israel from disregarding the same law.

Because Israel is violating “international humanitarian law” by defending itself against these terrorists.

No, Israel, instead, must simply lie back and enjoy the fireworks—the terrorists have, in the eyes of this UN person, inured themselves against any more serious response than opprobrium for their terrorism by the simple expedient of using children and civilians as shields.

Never mind that such protections simply increase, drastically, the value of these hostages, and it makes it all the more likely that terrorists will use them and increase their usage.

This UN person went on:

[She] criticized the US for financing Israel’s Iron Dome air defense system at the same time that residents in Gaza were under bombardment.

“No such protection has been provided to Gazans against the shelling[.]”

Because the terrorists must have the same defenses, or the Israelis must be denied the full capacity of their own defenses.

Never mind, again, that the Israelis wouldn’t be “shelling Gazans” if the Palestinian Authority terrorists weren’t shooting from among those Gazans. Never mind the larger case that the Israelis wouldn’t be shelling anything, if the PA terrorists weren’t engaged in their attacks on Israel.

Obama’s “Peace Talks”

Posted on by
Reply

This article is triggered by Gerald Seib’s recent piece in The Wall Street Journal.

A White House statement cited by Seib:

The President…reiterated the United States’ serious and growing concern about the rising number of Palestinian civilian deaths and the loss of Israeli lives, as well as the worsening humanitarian situation in Gaza[.]

Not a word about the primary cause of those Palestinian deaths, just the outrageous moral equivalence asserted between the terrorists’ assault on Israel and Israel’s defense against that assault, and through that the tacit implication (excuse the redundancy) that those Palestinian civilian deaths are Israel’s doing.

No harm to peace-making by Obama’s Cabinet there.

And this:

Meanwhile, Israel also was squirming over the talks between the US and five international powers and Iran over the Iranian nuclear program. As it became obvious that those talks were moving in the direction of an agreement that would leave Iran with a continuing capacity to enrich uranium, Israeli discomfort grew. When the talks were extended earlier this month for four more months, it grew further. A separate issue, yes, but one that affects the atmosphere.

No, this is not a separate issue; Iran’s nuclear weapons program and the Palestinian Authority’s terror war against Israel are inextricably intertwined. Let’s leave aside the fact that Iran is largely funding and almost exclusively arming the PA (apart from the latter’s primary industry of rocket-making within the Gaza Strip (itself supplied by inputs from Iran)). Iran has as its own goal, to use Iran’s words, of “wiping Israel from the map.” What does the Obama administration, and his Secretary of State (and Seib) think Iran will do with its uranium, enriched to weapons grade? The question answers itself: Iran will attack Iran with nuclear weapons, or supply the weapons to the PA (and/or other terrorist organizations in the region—Hezbollah comes to mind) for the purpose of seeing them used in Israel.

Iran’s nuclear weapons program is as much a threat to Israel’s existence as is the PA’s constant terror attacks. The PA is a client of Iran.

President Barack Obama, and his Cabinet, surely know this. From this, another question raises itself: what is the value—in fact, what is the purpose—of Obama’s “peace talk” efforts as they concern Israel and the Palestinian Authority?

UN Perfidy?

Posted on by
2

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon leveled his strongest criticism yet of Israel’s military operation in Gaza on Monday, accusing Israel of “pummeling” Gazans with “indiscriminate destruction” and warning Israel to fulfill its obligations as an “occupying power” to protect civilians.

Mr Ban stopped short of accusing Israel of targeting civilians, but he said that “every home, every school, every refuge” had become a target.

The UN carefully does not warn the Palestinian Authority to fulfill its obligations as the government of Gaza to protect civilians, to, much more, stop using civilians as shields. The UN carefully does not acknowledge that “‘every home, every school, every refuge’ had become a target” because the PA terrorists had made them so by storing their rockets in these places, had made them so by launching their rockets from these places.

And the UN carefully ignores the fact that it’s been caught—twice—storing the PA’s rockets in UNRWA facilities and then turning them over to the terrorists when discovered.

No, this is all Israel’s fault.

“In the name of humanity, the violence must stop,” Mr Ban said.

In the name of humanity, the terrorists must be stopped.