The Obama Administration Throws Israel Away

McCain and Lieberman on Israel. Video on the Senate floor yesterday. (Sen. Lieberman points out that this neighborhood of Jerusalem, even if Yasser Arafat had accepted Bill Clinton's peace deal--was going to be part of Israel--it's a very Jewish neighborhood)

Eric Cantor to Rahm Emanuel: 'Lower the volume' on Israel rhetoric. The Politico.

The Tribune defends this administration, but they are playing politics with Israeli lives.

Israel is our ally. They are not a terror state. They are being menaced by them with nuclear destruction.

More at Commentary:

While it condemns Israel, the Administration continues to ignore a host of Palestinian provocations that undermine prospects for peace in the region. Where is the outrage when top Fatah officials call for riots on the Temple Mount? Why does the Palestinian Authority get a pass when it holds a ceremony glorifying the woman responsible for one of the deadliest terror attack in Israel’s history? Surely, the Administration’s double standard has set back the peace process. …

And using this cynical, destructive distraction as an excuse for no solution on Iran.

More:

In recent weeks, the Obama Administration has endorsed "healthy relations" between Iran and Syria, mildly rebuked Syrian President Bashar Assad for accusing the U.S. of "colonialism," and publicly apologized to Moammar Gadhafi for treating him with less than appropriate deference after the Libyan called for "a jihad" against Switzerland.

When it comes to Israel, however, the Administration has no trouble rising to a high pitch of public indignation.

Read on. WSJ.

And Bret Stephens today, WSJ: The Settlements Aren't the Problem. The Palestinians' beef with Israel isn't territorial—it's existential.

More. VDH:

Some have remarked at the unusually harsh rhetoric accorded to the Israelis over the Jerusalem issue, especially the assumed American loss of face. Perhaps. But this administration has been embarrassed quite a lot, whether Putin’s snub of the missiles-for-Iran-help deal, the pathetic outreach video et al. to the obnoxious Ahmadinejad, Chavez’s various antics, and the more subtle Chinese putdowns. In each of these cases, American outrage seemed muted in comparison to what was accorded the Israelis—after all, a democracy thinking of building houses in Jerusalem is not quite like autocracies annexing Tibet, absorbing parts of Ossetia, sending agents into Columbia, or building a nuke on the sly. Instead, the American pique I think is intended to signal a rather sizable change in our foreign policy. Whereas in the past we argued with the Israelis privately, and put pressure on them through diplomatic channels, now we have joined the chorus of its public critics. And when the United States echoes the popular chorus of Europe, or even mimics the invective of the Arab world, there simply is no other power around to stop what will soon become a piling-on party. The message is out—say or do what you please about Israel, and it will more likely now resonate with the U.S.

Previous posts: RJC: Obama Administration's Escalation is Harsh & Undiplomatic, Ellen of 10th, Take Shelter Now, Tribune Curiously Incurious