[benny balerio]

Obama U-Turn on UN penalties for Iran, defensible borders for Israel
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis April 19, 2010, 2:18 PM (GMT+02:00)Tags: Hillary Clinton Israel Obama

US pulls another rug from Israeli securityPresident Barack Obama has done away with two key elements of US-Israeli strategic relations: His administration has given up on stiff UN Security Council sanctions on Iran over its nuclear drive, and gone back on the longstanding American commitment assuring Israel of recognized and defensible borders in any future accommodation with its Arab neighbors.

In the administration's message of congratulations to Israel on its 62nd Day of Independence, US Secretary of state Hillary Clinton mentions "recognized borders" while omitting the traditional "defensible."
debkafile's Washington sources report that following the talks held by Presidents Obama and Hu Jintao in Washington last week, the Administration is apparently engaged in a debate about whether to push for tough sanctions against Iran at the Security Council and run into opposition from China and other countries - or go for a quick UN General Assembly resolution, which would be non-binding.
The view William Burns, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, offered the House foreign affairs committee last week was that a UN resolution would clear the way for the European Union and other countries to "amplify the impact" of whatever sanctions are agreed on. Burns avoided mentioning the Security Council and indicated that the administration had little hope of any effective action on Iran by the world body.

It will be recalled that President Obama twice asked Israel to ignore Iran's missed deadlines and promised to promote effective UN Security Council sanctions if Iran continued to spurn his diplomatic efforts for curbing its nuclear program.
The last deadline was in December, 2009.
Yet on Monday, April 19, clearly lagging behind events in Washington, Israel's defense minister Ehud Barak said: "Now is the time for sanctions (against Iran)."
He was answering questions in a radio interview on Israel's annual day of mourning for its fallen servicemen
Neither he nor any other Israeli leader commented on an equally serious setback for Israel in Washington, which emerge from a conspicuous omission in Clinton's message of congratulations for Israel's Independence Day, which is celebrated Monday night and Tuesday:

"I have a deep personal commitment to Israel," she said. "And so does President Obama. Our nation will not waver in protecting Israel’s security and promoting Israel’s future. That is why pursuing peace and recognized borders for Israel is one of our top priorities."
By omitting "defensible borders" from her message, she spoke for the first US administration to abdicate its guarantee of defensible borders as a fundamental component of Israel's security, thereby nullifying her and the US president's pledge not to "waver in protecting Israel's security."
This key omission led to another worrying question about Israel's future borders: By whom must they be recognized in the view of the Obama administration?


..............................benny

[benny balerio]

Obama vs. Israel: Showdown at the UN?

April 20….(Fox News) The Obama administration is reportedly signaling another major shift in policy towards one of its staunchest allies, Israel, and this shift could change the way it votes at the Security Council. The change would mean an end to the US' use of its veto power in the United Nations Security Council when certain anti-Israel resolutions are introduced for a vote. Reports surfaced a couple of weeks ago, that a senior US diplomat met with Qatar's foreign minister in Paris. They discussed the possibility that the US was giving serious consideration to not using its veto if a vote on Israeli settlements was to come up. It has been the policy of successive administrations to veto virtually all anti-Israel resolutions at the Security Council. While the Israeli spokesperson at the United Nations would not comment on the reports, US officials at the UN told Fox News that there is no such initiative before the Security Council and they are not "pursuing or encouraging such action", but some critics believe they are playing a game of smoke and mirrors. Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and Touro College and says the administration, like none other before them, appears prepared to blackmail Israel at the UN. She says "The administration may imagine that the threat of withholding the veto at the Security Council, or the failure to oppose vigorously any one of a constant stream of anti-Israel UN concoctions, will be good for the United States. They will be dead wrong." She believes "Israel's enemies are America's enemies, and an effort by the Obama administration to use the UN as a tool to blackmail Israel or undermine Israel's independence and security is a double-edged sword." John Bolton the former US ambassador to the UN, and now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy in Washington says that successive US administrations have played a vital role in stopping the delegitimizing and marginalization of Israel at the UN, and that foes "knowing that the United States was not prepared to countenance mischief making in the Security Council alone deterred considerable unhelpful activity, and at least mitigated much of what remained." He says "If President Obama materially changes this long-standing, bipartisan American policy, peace in the Middle East will be set back. America's friends and allies alike will conclude that the Obama Administration is indeed a feckless ally." Bayefsky, who is also editor of EYEontheUN.org, says "If the Obama administration believes that it can bring about more peace and harmony and respect for America by sitting on its hands and refusing to exercise the veto, while the likes of Russia and China and Lebanon (which is currently a member) revel in a hate-filled denunciation of Israel, (and veto anything against Iran) then the administration is delusional. The refusal to exercise the veto will be read as weakness.

.................................benny