Tuesday, July 17, 2007

If You Can Envision Taiwan Falling Without U.S. Intervention, You Should Be Able To Envision Israel Falling Without One Too


The People’s Republic of China (PRC) wants Taiwan. The U.S. has a treaty that says it will defend Taiwan from attack.

If push comes to shove, will the U.S. really defend Taiwan, or will it let Taiwan fall?

If the U.S. lets Taiwan fall, all similar U.S. treaties could be considered worthless. If the U.S. defends Taiwan, it will be a huge mess—a mess the people of the U.S. might not be willing to stomach.

Fortunately, while the PRC gets economically and militarily stronger, they are also preoccupied preparing for the 2008 Olympics. Depending on the state of their economy, military readiness, and the political health of the Communist Party, sometime after 2008—maybe even a decade or two later—the status of Taiwan will undoubtedly create renewed global tension.

How does this relate to Israel?

Friends who reject the idea that Israel must be larger to be viable, often say, “but the U.S. will ALWAYS be there to support Israel.”

They simply can’t envision a world in which the U.S. allows Israel to fall. Interestingly, many of these same folks also liken the U.S. involvement in Iraq to Vietnam.

Now recall that in 1967, the U.S. didn’t intercede to prevent the six-day war, a war Israel might have lost. The U.S. was in no position to intercede—because of Vietnam.

What will the U.S. not be in a position to do because of Iraq? Or some future military entanglement?

I hope the parallel is clear.

Israel must be stronger not weaker. It must be large enough to be independently viable, not the U.S. client state it is today.

As renewed efforts to force an ill-conceived two-state solution are thrust upon Israel in the coming months, keep the following in mind:

If you can envision Taiwan falling without a U.S. intervention, you should be able to envision Israel falling without one too.

--David Naggar

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

It’s Okay If The Hashemite King of Jordan Gets A Little Testy


“Jordan's King Abdullah II told European Union envoys the issue of forming a confederation with the Palestinians would not be raised until the establishment of an independent state.

"The concept of Jordanian-Palestinian confederation or federation is not in our dictionary, and we won't tackle this issue for the time being," Abdullah said in remarks carried by the official Petra news agency.” From the Associated Press, article entitled, Jordan: Palestinian State, Then Alliance, June 11, 2007.

“Meanwhile, a caustic response to the idea of such a solution came from King Abdullah of Jordan who said Sunday during an interview that 'we reject the formula of confederation and federation and we believe that proposing this issue at this specific point in time is a conspiracy against both Palestine and Jordan.' The King added that he was 'fed up talking about this issue.'” From Haaretz, article entitled, Jordanian Role Increasingly Seen As Crucial To Peace Process, by Shmuel Rosner, July 3, 2007.

* * *

It’s likely to be a hot summer in the Middle East.

As the cracks in the artificially created Arab Nation-States continue to reveal themselves, it is important to keep in mind that there are many Arab leaders whose hold on power is tenuous. King Abdullah is one of them.

As “radical” Muslim elements press to expand influence, events in the Middle East could get quickly out of hand. Of course, the “radicals” appear to be mainstream since they seem to have a fair amount of local support.

Opposing these “radicals” is enormous international pressure to keep things from spinning out of control, and this is starting to put unwanted pressure on the King.

International envoys have a non-benevolent agenda to bring peace and stability to the region. As part of this agenda, envoys are searching to solve the Israeli-Palestinian quagmire.

The actual cost to the locals of implementing their agenda—be it Jewish Israelis or Palestinian Arabs—is not important to them.

The envoys want an end to hostilities, and any solution will do.

They are dismayed by Hamas’ easy power grab in Gaza. They are concerned about what may happen next. They do not want the entire region to explode.

But thanks to this year’s events, many envoys are FINALLY uncertain that a truly independent Palestine will be peaceful.

And so, they are beginning to look for solutions outside-of-the-box—the box being the so-called two-state solution within the confines of Israel and the territories.

Their first small peek outside-of-the-box is to try and involve Jordan. They want the King to help govern the West Bank (Judea and Samaria).

But the King will simply not help anyone who thinks outside-of-the-box.

As the press quotes show, the King is getting agitated. He will never willingly lend his hand because his necessary primary interest is the self-preservation of his Hashemite Kingdom.

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan has its roots in present day Saudi Arabia. But the Saudis defeated the Hashemite clan in war about 80 years ago. In the post World War I Middle-East border shuffle, British politicians carved out, from what was supposed to be a homeland for the Jews, a land for the King’s great grandfather to rule.

In the last 40 years, Arabs in the West Bank began identifying themselves as Palestinian. Most of the inhabitants of the King’s Jordan have also come to think of themselves as Palestinians.

This is very dangerous news for his artificially created Kingdom. Too many unruly Palestinians to rule and the King’s Kingdom will fade into history.

As I’ve written, the Israeli-Palestinian problem is an EFFECT of a larger Israeli-Muslim/Arab conflict. It is not the CAUSE of it. But expect the well-spoken King to ALWAYS say that the root cause of Middle-East turmoil is the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

The King will continue to “compassionately” speak out in favor of a two-state solution within Israel and the territories. He will insist it is the only solution. He will insist on keeping Jordan out of it.

Why? Because ANY solution that involves Jordan jeopardizes his Kingdom.

But the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan is likely to crumble sooner or later anyway. The tide of history is against it.

The good news, other than for the Jordanian monarch, is this: Finally, the box has been opened, if only a little.

Also, when envoys peek outside-of-the-box, they will notice that there is plenty of room in the wider area for all who live there now.

For regional peace and prosperity, it is time that Middle-East envoys focus on the welfare of people, not on the welfare of existing regimes.

It is in the world’s best interest that the international community promotes the idea of Israel becoming viable in all respects. This means a larger Israel.

It is also in the world’s best interest to pressure King Abdullah and other dictators of adjacent Arab states to allow Palestinians to live productive lives, either in their own entity, or as first-class citizens of existing Arab states.

For a solution that brings long-lasting peace, beyond establishing a larger Israel and a place for Palestinians to thrive, it is also in the world’s best interest that borders of other States in the region be reconfigured.

The new map lines should reflect local considerations. The states that currently exist only exist as distinct entities by the serendipity of historical map lines imposed by the British and French. They are relics of a bygone era.

Justice is not served by propping up dictators and monarchs. Justice is not served by imposing artificial map lines. Justice is not served by refusing to let go of the status quo.

Peace requires change. And it’s okay if in the process, the Hashemite King of Jordan gets a little testy.

--David Naggar