But, Settlements Obstruct Peace…

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3732514,00.html, June 14, 2009

Prime Minister Netanyahu is wrong to assume that his June 14 speech will soften President Obama's strident criticism of "settlements" (Jewish communities in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria). At the same time, President Obama is wrong to consider "settlements" as an obstacle to peace. 

Obama Pressures? No Need to Panic!

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3727711,00.html, June 05, 2009

President Obama's speech in Cairo intensified psychological pressure on the Jewish State.  Obama erodes Israel's special standing in the US.  He has adopted evenhandedness and moral equivalence toward Israel (a staunch democratic ally, a role model of counter-terrorism) and toward the Palestinian Authority (an ally of US' enemies, a role model of terrorism and hate-education). He ignores Israel's ancient history, suggesting that the justification for its existence is rooted in the Holocaust. And, he has transformed "Settlements" into the crux of the Arab-Israel conflict, although Palestinian terrorism and Arab wars against Israel preceded the 1948 establishment of the Jewish State and the 1968 establishment of the first "Settlement."

Israel Can Say "NO" to the USA (A Win-Win Proposition)

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3721725,00.html, May 24, 2009

Critical milestones, in the history of the Israel, occurred while constructive disagreements dominated the relations between the Jewish State and its only significant ally, the USA.

 

When a junior partner loses the capability to say "No" to a senior partner, then both lose!

The Self-Destruct Iran-Palestinian Linkage

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3713083,00.html, May 08, 2009

In May 1948, Secretary of State George Marshall bullied Prime Minister David Ben Gurion against declaration of independence. Thus, he professed a supposed linkage between the establishment of the Jewish State and the denial of Arab oil supply to the US, on the eve of a potential world war between the US and the USSR. It was Ben Gurion's defiance of pressure, which helped clear-thinking Americans to refute the baseless linkage.

In May 2009, the US Administration intends to roll Israel back to the 1949 Lines, including the repartitioning of Jerusalem. In order to pressure Israel, the Administration contends an ostensible linkage between the stop-Iran-campaign and the Palestinian issue. Just like its 1949 predecessor, the 2009 linkage aims at misrepresenting Israel as a peace obstructionist, which harms US national security.

IRAN TARGETS THE USA

http://www.jpost.com/Cooperations/Google/Default.aspx?q=yoram%20ettinger%20iran%20targets%20the%20US, March 23, 2009

The prevention of a nuclear Iran constitutes a top US national security priority.  It sheds light on a special aspect of US-Israel relationship: defiance of mutual threats.

Israel is not a Banana Republic

http://www.ynet.co.il/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3665583,00.html, February 06, 2009

In October 1998, on the eve of the Wye Plantation Summit, Democratic leaders of the US House of Representatives told Secretary of State, Madelyn Albright: "Should President Clinton decide to pressure Israel, he would face a Democratic-Republican opposition."  In September 1982, Prime Minister Begin rejected the Reagan Plan – which called for an Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria – by throwing the official envelope at the lap of the US Ambassador, declaring: "Israel is not a Banana Republic."  In spite of – and probably due to – the blunt rejection, the Reagan era enhanced US-Israel strategic relations in an unprecedented manner.

Quo Vadis Obama?

"Makor Rishon" weekly, December 26, 2008

The ties with the US constitute Israel's backbone militarily, diplomatically, financially, commercially and technologically.  These ties are not shaped exclusively by the President, even when the President's own party enjoys overwhelming majorities in both chambers of Congress. Much is shaped by the House and the Senate, sometimes in defiance of the White House. Moreover, Israel is not a classic-foreign-policy-issue.  Israel benefits from a unique foundation of mutual-values, which precedes its own establishment in 1948 and even 1776. US-Israel relations have constituted a win-win two-way street. How will they be impacted by the incoming Obama Administration?

Obama, McCain and Israel's National Security

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3602766,00.html, September 26, 2008

The policy of US presidents, toward Israel, is a derivative of their worldview, and not of their campaign statements and position papers.

 

A worldview shapes presidential attitude toward Israel as a strategic asset or a liability and toward Jerusalem, Judea & Samaria and the Golan Heights.  A presidential worldview determines the scope of the US posture of deterrence in face of Middle East and global threats, which directly impacts Israel's national security.

Jewish Impact on US Democracy

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3593937,00.html, September 05, 2008

Intense Jewish participation in US elections has been nurtured by home-court conditions: The US considers Judaism a key factor in the foundation of its cultural, ideological, legal and political systems. The trilateral covenant among the US, the Jewish People and the Jewish State was established by the Puritans during the 17th century, expanded by the Founding Fathers and sustained until today.

 

 

Obama’s Advisors – A Source for Concern

Ynet (Hebrew edition), July 23, 2008

Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential candidate, is not a key member of the Senate Committees on Foreign Relations, Armed Services of Intelligence.  He has not initiated/led any significant legislation and has not devoted himself to national security issues. He surged into the Senate and the presidential race from the Illinois local-political-social arena.  Obama relies on a battery of experienced advisors, who influence/shape his world view and maybe even US policy and US-Israel relations for the next 4-8 years.  However, the record of his advisors – most of them served in the Carter and Clinton Administrations – constitutes a source for concern.

Displaying results 151-160 (of 200)
 |<  <  11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20  >  >|