It’s all about Israel

In one of the more provocative columns I’ve read in quite a while, Rick Moran of Right Wing Nuthouse yesterday penned a somewhat dismal bit of prognostication called Embrace the Horror. I have now read the piece three separate times, as well as listening to a discussion of it between Rick and Ed Morrissey on his Hot Air show yesterday. The article is a comprehensive look at the trials and tribulations facing “President Obama” during his first (and possibly only) term and I highly encourage you to read it if you’ve not done so already.

There was something about it, though, which simply didn’t sit right with me, though I couldn’t put my finger on it until this morning. One of the basic disagreements I have, though certainly not the chief one, is the assumption that Obama is a dead lock to win in November. While certainly possible, I still believe that the Illinois Senator has a tough row to hoe in his attempts to make his case with voters, including many in his own party.

Moran is certainly correct that the next president will face many daunting challenges. These, as he points out, include a moribund economy with no silver bullet solution in sight. They will also have to deal with the reality of disentangling ourselves from Iraq as opposed to the easy rhetoric of calling for immediately moving toward withdrawl. Any such plan will have to be put in place over the objections of some military leaders and a public who, while disenchanted with the war, are unwilling to see such a withdrawl turn into a rout or leave us looking defeated. Additionally, a host of other challenging domestic issues – taxes and NAFTA among others – await the next Oval Office resident, and Rick is absolutely right in noting that these will create a difficult swamp to wade through.

But it’s in the area of foreign policy where I believe Mr. Moran and I fail to see eye to eye.

The Iranian situation will resolve itself with or without President Obama’s help. If he actively tries to prevent Israel from removing what they believe is an existential threat, his presidency will be over. And since the US is going to get blamed for anything Israel does anyway, my guess is he will tacitly support any Israeli action against the Iranian nuclear program.

Would he attack Iran? Despite his bellicose comments about not allowing the Iranians to develop nuclear weapons, since there will likely be no evidence that the Iranians are constructing nukes, it is extremely unlikely that a President Obama would greenlight any attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. Israel, of course, doesn’t have that luxury and once it is clear that Iran could enrich uranium on an industrial scale to the 85-90% level, all bets are off and US support or no, they will hit the Iranians with everything they’ve got.

I agree that Obama will be highly unlikely to strike any sort of first blow in another “preemptive war” against Iran, given his endless speeches regarding the foolhardy nature of Bush’s incursion into Iraq. But will simply staying on the sidelines during a potential Israeli attack on Iran suffice or be a substitute for any actual “policy” regarding Iran? Obama has mouthed all the right words – typical of all politicians from both parties – to ensure he does not alienate the Jewish vote in the United States. The question, at least for me, is whether or not the candidate of change has the political will to take a fresh look at our country’s policy toward Israel and act accordingly.

A showdown may indeed be brewing between Israel and Iran. As Moran correctly observes, Iran’s military is pretty much a joke compared to Israel, with the exception of their limited missile capability, and none of her allies on the Arab street will likely be eager to enter into open warfare at her side for fear of potential U.S. reprisals. But what would the U.S. response be to a preemptive strike by Israel against Iran’s nuclear facilities, either today or under a potential Obama presidency?

The default answer for some time now seems to be that we would rush in to Israel’s defense, justifying her actions and letting the Arab world know that they had best not mess with our partner in the Middle East. The question, at least for an unapologietic isolationist such as myself, is whether or not that is the correct or even desirable response. What would President Obama do in the event of such a collision of interests?

Absent some sort of concrete proof that Iran had moved to create nuclear weapons and in the face of their continued claims that their work is solely geared toward peaceful power production, an attack by Isreal would be viewed across much of the world in the same light as the United States invasion of Iraq. As in the past, it seems likely that the United Nations would immediately move to condemn Israel for such a preemptive strike. Would we once again, as in so many times past, use our position on the Security Council to veto any such resolution? Or would Obama demonstrate that he had truly learned from the lessons of Iraq?

We have been the “big brother” to Israel for my entire adult life, unquestioning and unwavering. And while this noble cause has doubtless been of tremendous benefit to the Israeli people, constantly under threat of extinction at the hands of outraged Middle Eastern neighbors, what has been our biggest reward? The answer is, the antipathy of the Muslim world towards the United States. This has always been – and remains – the elephant in the room of which none wish to speak. Why is al Qada at war with us? You can talk all day about how they “hate us for our freedoms” or how they want to convert us – and the entire world – to Islam. But in the end, it’s Israel. It’s always been Israel. It is, for so many of these nations, the perpetual thorn in their collective side… the wound which will never heal. And lacking the military capability or global support to confront us in a direct, military fashion, they turn to terrorism to strike out at us whenever and where ever they can.

Israel has been standing strong for more than half a century. Under our superpower umbrella they have developed a military capability which is the envy of nations many times their size. But will there ever come a time when our national conscience will allow us to open up a new conversation on this? Is there not a point at which the global community can say that Israel has grown up and should now be capable of standing on its own two feet, releiving us of the burden of acting as the big brother on the playground as we continue to inflame the Muslim world against us?

Doubtless many readers will feel a desire to let fly with the usual claims that I’m some sort of anti-semite because of this piece. Feel free – I’ve heard it all before. I bear no animus toward Israel as a nation and certainly harbor no anger towards Jews of any nation. But this relationship we share with Israel is unique and decidely one-sided in both benefits and costs. And the price we are paying for it continues to rise while the rewards look more and more intangible. Feel free to line up the firing squad, readers. I’m ready for it.