Blair Cautions Obama and Her Hideousness, Catherine Ashton, on Iran

As her Hideousness, Catherine Ashton, poses smiling (fortunately for us with her mouth closed) beside her Iranian counterpart at talks in Istanbul aimed at curbing the Islamic Republic's nuclear weapons ambitions, Tony Blair had this to say about Iran:

"'It [Iran] has to be confronted and changed. Iran is a looming challenge. It is negative and destabilizing. It supports terrorists,' said Blair on Friday during his remarks at the Chilcot inquiry, the British inquiry into the war in Iraq.

'I say this to you with all of the passion I possibly can -- at some point the West has to get out of what I think is a wretched policy or posture of apology for believing that we are causing what the Iranians are doing, or what these extremists are doing,' said Blair who serves as the Quartet representative to the Middle East.

Blair stated that he could see the 'impact and the influence of Iran everywhere.'"

http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=204743

Is Blair correct? Can the impact and influence of Iran be felt everywhere? You darn well better believe it.

As previously observed in this blog, the West is well on its way to losing Jordan. (See: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2010/12/war-in-middle-east-obama-losing-jordan.html). Not surprisingly, protestors, including members of the Muslim Brotherhood, took to Jordan's streets on Friday, demanding that the government step down.

Also, yesterday, Walid Jumblatt, head of Lebanon's Druze, ominously declared on Friday that he would side with Syria and Hezbollah, i.e. Iran, in forming a new Lebanese government. Jumblatt, the ultimate survivor and weathervane in Lebanon, has acknowledged that he is fearful that Hezbollah might seek to harm Lebanon's Druze minority (see: http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=204692) and has abandoned Saad Hariri.

How long until Obama gets tough? Is he even capable of standing up to Ahmadinejad? As further stated by Blair:

"President Obama - not President Bush - goes in March 2009 to Cairo, right in the heart of Islam. He makes a speech where he says effectively 'put aside the Bush era, I'm now offering the hand of friendship, you, Iran can come into partnership, you are an ancient, proud civilisation.'

What's the response he gets? They carry on with the terrorism, they carry on with the destabilisation, they carry on with the nuclear weapons.

At some point we have to get our head out of the sand and understand they are going to carry on with this."

Stay tuned . . .

The Obama Middle East Peace Initiative: Destined to Fail

There were some glorious photo ops in Washington last week with Obama, Netanyahu, Abbas, Mubarak and King Abdullah II striding down long carpeted corridors wearing serious faces. Hillary, seated between Netanyahu and Abbas, smiled like the Cheshire cat. Tony Blair, flown into town as the representative of the Quartet, added his imprimatur to the festivities. But the necessary groundwork had not been laid by the bungling Obama administration, and all, unfortunately, is destined to come to naught.

The Palestinian Authority, i.e. Fatah, does not want an agreement, at least not now, and until they are ready, it simply isn't going to happen, no matter what goodies Washington offers them. Why? Because if you want peace in the Middle East, you need to be willing to die for peace. Anwar Sadat died for peace. King Hussein of Jordan proclaimed his readiness to die as a martyr for peace. Abbas, on the other hand, is planning to die peacefully in his bed, many years hence.

Examine the contradictory confused responses coming from Fatah in the aftermath of the Washington hafla (Arabic for party or celebration). Already being branded a traitor, Abbas is searching under the carpet for an excuse to abandon the talks. On Monday, Palestinian newspaper Al Quds reported that Abbas has now stated that if pressured on borders and refugees, he "will take his bags and leave," and Netanyahu was forced to call Abbas to coax him back to the negotiating table (http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?ID=187294&R=R1).

Meanwhile, Abbas's cronies also can't decide on which side of the fence they should be standing:

"Following last week’s ceremony in Washington, the chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, gave a series of interviews to various media outlets.

In one interview, he was quoted as saying that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was not serious about reaching peace with the Palestinians and that his only goal was to waste time. Erekat later issued a denial, saying his words had been taken out of context.

* * * *

Making statements and denying them, often within hours, has become almost a daily event in the politics of the PA. The latest example was that of Fatah’s Muhammad Dahlan, who, in an interview with an Arab newspaper on Sunday, denounced Netanyahu as a 'swindler.'

After his remarks were published in Israel, the former security commander rushed to issue a denial, claiming that his words had been taken out of context."

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=187357

Iran and Syria, via their proxies Hezbollah and Hamas, will be fighting tooth and nail against any potential peace arrangement, and it is no accident that a Qassam rocket fell on the southern Israeli town of Sderot this morning.

Syria has historically opposed any Palestinian-Israeli peace agreement, which comes, in their belief, at the expense of a Syrian-Israeli arrangement, which, again in their belief, takes precedence.

But the bigger picture involves Iranian, i.e. Shiite, nuclear aspirations and the opposition of the Sunni Arab bloc to any attempt by Tehran to achieve hegemony in the region. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan are all callous to Palestinian interests, and Abbas for them is no more than an expendable pawn.

Obama specializes in photo ops, and wonderful photographs were taken of the American president pretending to play diplomat extraordinaire. However, expectations on the Palestinian street have now been created, and when the talks ultimately fail, we will be hearing in the suks of Ramallah, Hebron and Nablus, "I told you so."

Will we then see a resurgence of Hamas? A new intifada? I hope not.

Tony Blair on the Delegitimization of Israel

On Tuesday at a symposium held at the IDC Herzliya Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy and Strategy concerning “The De-legitimization of Israel, Threats, Challenges and Responses,” the keynote address was delivered by Rt. Hon. Tony Blair. Mr. Blair, who now serves as Special Envoy of the Quartet on the Middle East, made an impassioned speech, whose content deserves wide circulation. Below are highlights from his address:

There are two forms of de-legitimisation. One is traditional, obvious and from the quarters it emanates, expected. It is easier to deal with. This is attack from those who openly question Israel’s right to exist. It is easier to deal with, because it is so clear. When the President of Iran says he wants Israel wiped off the face of the map, we all know where we are. This is not to minimise the threat of course. It remains and is profound. It is just to say that were this the only form of de-legitimisation, it wouldn’t warrant a conference of analysis; simply a course of action.

The other form is more insidious, harder to spot, harder to anticipate and harder to deal with, because many of those engaging in it, will fiercely deny they are doing so. It is this form that is in danger of growing, and whose impact is potentially highly threatening, in part because it isn’t obvious.

I would define in it this way: it is a conscious or often unconscious resistance, sometimes bordering on refusal, to accept Israel has a legitimate point of view. Note that I say refusal to accept Israel has a legitimate point of view. I’m not saying refusal to agree with it. People are perfectly entitled to agree or not; but rather an unwillingness to listen to the other side, to acknowledge that Israel has a point, to embrace the notion that this is a complex matter that requires understanding of the other way of looking at it.

The challenge is that this often does not come from ill-intentioned people; but well-intentioned. They would dispute vigorously such a characterisation of their mindset. They would point to the injustice of Palestinian suffering, acts of the Israeli Government or army which are unjustifiable and they would say, rightly, that you cannot say that to criticise Israel is to de-legitimise it. Such minds are often to be found in the west. They will say they advocate a two state solution and they will point to that as proof positive that they accept Israel’s existence fully.

. . .

So, for example, on Gaza they won’t accept that Israel might have a right to search vessels bringing cargo into Gaza, given that even this year over 100 rockets have been fired from that territory into Israel. Leave aside the multiple investigations relating to the flotilla, upon which there will naturally be heated debate. I mean a refusal to accept that, however handled, no Israeli government could be indifferent to the possibility of weapons and missiles being brought into Gaza.

I often have a conversation about the West Bank which goes like this. Someone says: Israel must lift the occupation. I reply: I agree but it has to be sure that when it does so, there will be security and a Palestinian force capable of preventing terrorism. They say: so you’re supporting occupation. I say: I’m not. I’m simply pointing out that if Hamas, with an unchanged position on Israel, were running the West Bank, Israel would have a perfectly legitimate right to be concerned about it’s security.

A constant conversation I have with some, by no means all, of my European colleagues is to argue to them: don’t apply rules to the Government of Israel that you would never dream of applying to your own country. In any of our nations, if there were people firing rockets, committing acts of terrorism and living next door to us, our public opinion would go crazy.

. . . .

Let me tell you why I am a passionate believer in Israel. This is a democracy. It’s Parliament is vibrant. Its politics is, well, not notably restrained, let’s say. Its press is free. Its people have rights and they are enforced. I had an argument with a friend about Israel. I said to them: ‘ok let’s assume you are charged with a crime you didn’t commit and the penalty is 20 years in prison. And you’re a critic of the Government. Tell me: under which country’s legal system, in this region, would you prefer to be tried?’ He struggled for a bit and then said: ‘that’s not the point.’ ‘But it is’ I replied.

Look around the world about what we admire about the Jewish people: their contribution to art, culture, literature, music, business and philanthropy. It’s a spirit that is identifiable, open and rather wonderful. Whatever bigotry is, it is the opposite of it. It is a free spirit. On holiday I read the new biography of Einstein. Having in early life taken not much interest in the issue, he became an ardent supporter of Israel. But look at the character of the Israel he supported: like Einstein himself – a free thinker, a rebellious thinker even, but one supremely attuned to the future.

That is the Israel people like me support. So guard it; keep it. I am a religious person myself. But the society I want to live in, is one that treats me no better as a result; makes my view one amongst many; and pursues science, technology and progress with vigour and without prejudice. The best answer to the de-legitimisation of Israel lies in the character of Israel itself and in the openness, fair-mindedness and creativity of ordinary Israelis. That character and those people built the State of Israel. They remain it’s guardians. They are why to de-legitimise Israel is not only an affront to Israelis but to all who share the values of a free human spirit.

The entirety of Mr. Blair's address can be seen at: http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/tony-blairs-5-steps-to-counter-insidious-deligitimization-of-israel/

A pity that the "liberal" (there is nothing liberal about them) columnists at The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN, not to mention those writing for news organizations in Blair's home country, will never consider these remarks. Participants in a blind, frenzied orgy of hatred, they are too deep in self-denial.