










Sign Up To Get
Press Releases

Past Guests

Book Tovia
for a lecture

Submit
Show Ideas

Tell Your Friends About Us

|

This is the place where Tovia answers questions from around the world that are
submitted each week.
|
| |
Can the
Prime Minister of Israel stand up to the United
States given the debt they owe them for standing
with them?
What do you feel would be
the consequences, could Israel withstand these
consequences?
While
campaigning for president, George W. Bush
repeatedly promised America that if elected, his
administration would never pressure the Jewish
State in the manner of his predecessor. It would
"only make suggestions," he assured voters. That
important promise meant a lot to Americans who
were deeply concerned about the reckless manner
with which President Clinton pushed his deadly
vision for "peace" in the Middle East. It was a
promise, however, that Bush would never keep.
Quite the contrary, no sitting president
in US history ever unilaterally called for a
Palestinian State, and no previous US
administration ever demanded that Israel
"willingly" accept a document inspired by
Israel's most implacable enemy, Saudi Arabia.
Yet apparently, Prime Minister Sharon is having
great difficulty withstanding the crushing
pressure that the Bush administration is
applying on his bewildered country.
To
make matters worse, Israel is crawling through
one of its worst economic crises in its young
history, and Bush knows it. Its once flourishing
tourism industry was shattered by a crushing,
low-grade war brought on by America's
not-too-ingenious "peace" initiatives of the
past decade. Reckless schemes from Madrid to
Oslo, engulfed the Jewish State in a bitter
conflict that not only produced thousands of
grieving Jewish families, but countless empty
Israeli hotel rooms as well.
Bear in
mind, the intifada was born out of high
expectations in the Arab world that were
conceived in the Pentagon, and went unsatisfied.
The Arabs have a laundry list of demands that
they thought America's "peace" initiatives might
deliver. They insist on sovereignty over all of
ancient Jerusalem, and dream of the day their
"refugees" flood Israeli cities like Yafo and
Haifa, and bring an end to a Jewish homeland. In
the end, the Arabs were disappointed, so they
launched their intifada that exterminated more
than 1,000 innocent Jewish lives, and devastated
Israel's promising economy.
Now more
than ever, Israel must challenge the PLO in the
manner that the US confronted the Taliban: on
the battlefield. When Bush declared that he
would not negotiate with the monsters who
destroyed 3,000 innocent American lives on that
horrible Tuesday morning on 9/11, he was
directing his country on a firm course for
success. The debacle of limited Vietnam-type
military campaigns would not be repeated.
America's new enemies in the Middle East would
be brought to their knees.
Although the
US has to this date not veered from that
unyielding road map, the same American
administration demands that Israel never take
it. Instead, Bush slapped on Israel's little
table a non-negotiable Road Map and demanded a
Jewish signature. In one fell swoop, he
unwittingly adopted the well-worn European
mindset that Jews can be ordered where they may
and may not live. Needless to say, the eerie
parallelism to the dark ages of the mid 19th
century are chilling, and the Europeans love it.
Does Israel's sovereignty permit the
Jewish state to destroy Arab organizations that
commit ethnic genocide against the children of
Israel? History says that it has no choice. Does
the Prime Minister of Israel have the obligation
to protect his terrified citizens from Arab
executioners? That is Sharon's mandate. Will the
Bush Administration threaten sanctions against
Israel should it refuse to comply with a plan
for a Palestinian state by the end of the year?
There is no doubt. Would the American people
permit its government to choke the beleaguered
Jewish State? Not on your life.
Americans are still mourning the dead
who perished together in lower Manhattan, and
recall as though it were yesterday when
Palestinians danced on their streets in raw
celebration over the destruction of the World
Trade Center. Americans have a deep love for
Israel that is only strengthened by our shared
moral principals. After all, both the US and
Israel were born out of the same crucible: We
were both fleeing European intolerance. We are
sister countries; Israel can say "No" to her
well-heeled sibling.
Moreover, a
presidential election year is around the corner,
and if Bush lifts a finger against America's
only friend in the Middle East, his core
constituency - patriotic, conservative Americans
-- will stay home election day. Israel can say
"No" to the nervous Bush administration.
Finally, thanks to the American
constitution, the Executive branch cannot act
unilaterally. Given that both Houses of Congress
are more pro-Israel than the Knesset, Sharon has
little to worry about. The unwavering notion of
an eternal, undivided Jewish Jerusalem has
become more popular in Washington than
Jerusalem. Israel can say "No" to the president,
and the halls of Congress will applaud.
No doubt, London is demanding from
Washington that British loyalty during the
recent Persian Gulf War be rewarded in Israeli
currency. Sharon must now dig deep, real deep,
and courageously declare to Powell and Blair
that the PLO are little more than the Taliban
with a public relations firm, and Israel has a
job to do in Ramallah. Israel can say "No" to
the State Department and its European coddlers,
and the American people will applaud. The
question that now remains, is Sharon ready for
the ovations?
|
|
Back
|
|
|
|