A Green Light to Invade Israel?

Lauri Regan
The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that the Obama administration is supporting the implementation of a United Nations doctrine that would approve military action in order to prevent genocide. While not legally required to act, the countries supporting the doctrine (including the U.S., China, and Russia) have all expressed the political will to act in the case of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, or crimes against humanity.

While sounding well intentioned, I fear that the Obama administration and every Israel-hating member of the United Nations will use this doctrine as a weapon against Israel.
Prior to Obama’s election, many concerned about his stance on matters relating to Israel looked to an interview given by his chief foreign policy adviser at the time, Samantha Power, in which she stated that a military invasion of Israel may be necessary in order to create a Palestinian state and prevent genocide. Ms. Power, who is now the director of multilateral affairs at the National Security Council, stated:

“In the Palestine [sic] and Israeli situation, there’s an abundance of information and what we don’t need is some kind of early warning mechanism. What we need is a willingness to actually put something on the line and sort of helping the situation. And putting something on the line might mean alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import. It may more crucially mean sacrificing or investing, I think, more than sacrificing, literally billions of dollars not in servicing Israeli’s [sic] military but actually investing in the new state of Palestine. In investing billions of dollars it will probably take also to support, I think, what will have to be a mammoth protection force…a meaningful military presence because it seems to me at this stage and this is true of actual genocides as well and not just major human rights abuses which we’re seeing there, but is that you have to go in as if you’re serious. You have to put something on the line and unfortunately imposition of a solution on unwilling parties…Unfortunately, it does require external intervention…”

So here we have a high ranking member of the Obama administration who believes that “major human rights abuses” are occurring in Israel and that in order to correct that situation, military aid to Israel should cease. Instead, this high ranking government official is advising the President that US taxpayer dollars should be used to invest in “Palestine” and to sustain a military presence in Israel in order to impose her ideology on a US ally.
 
Furthermore, the U.S. is now on board with a UN doctrine that would support military intervention in order to prevent human rights abuses. This is a doctrine that would be enforced by an anti-Semitic international peace-keeping organization that has passed innumerable resolutions condemning Israel yet ignored human rights violations the world over (not to mention the human rights violators that sit on the Security Council and Human Rights Council that will be making these determinations).

The question that I have is how far will Obama take his destructive Mideast policies? Will he use this doctrine as a hat on which to pin a “final solution” to the Mideast conflict?


The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that the Obama administration is supporting the implementation of a United Nations doctrine that would approve military action in order to prevent genocide. While not legally required to act, the countries supporting the doctrine (including the U.S., China, and Russia) have all expressed the political will to act in the case of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, or crimes against humanity.

While sounding well intentioned, I fear that the Obama administration and every Israel-hating member of the United Nations will use this doctrine as a weapon against Israel.
Prior to Obama’s election, many concerned about his stance on matters relating to Israel looked to an interview given by his chief foreign policy adviser at the time, Samantha Power, in which she stated that a military invasion of Israel may be necessary in order to create a Palestinian state and prevent genocide. Ms. Power, who is now the director of multilateral affairs at the National Security Council, stated:

“In the Palestine [sic] and Israeli situation, there’s an abundance of information and what we don’t need is some kind of early warning mechanism. What we need is a willingness to actually put something on the line and sort of helping the situation. And putting something on the line might mean alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import. It may more crucially mean sacrificing or investing, I think, more than sacrificing, literally billions of dollars not in servicing Israeli’s [sic] military but actually investing in the new state of Palestine. In investing billions of dollars it will probably take also to support, I think, what will have to be a mammoth protection force…a meaningful military presence because it seems to me at this stage and this is true of actual genocides as well and not just major human rights abuses which we’re seeing there, but is that you have to go in as if you’re serious. You have to put something on the line and unfortunately imposition of a solution on unwilling parties…Unfortunately, it does require external intervention…”

So here we have a high ranking member of the Obama administration who believes that “major human rights abuses” are occurring in Israel and that in order to correct that situation, military aid to Israel should cease. Instead, this high ranking government official is advising the President that US taxpayer dollars should be used to invest in “Palestine” and to sustain a military presence in Israel in order to impose her ideology on a US ally.
 
Furthermore, the U.S. is now on board with a UN doctrine that would support military intervention in order to prevent human rights abuses. This is a doctrine that would be enforced by an anti-Semitic international peace-keeping organization that has passed innumerable resolutions condemning Israel yet ignored human rights violations the world over (not to mention the human rights violators that sit on the Security Council and Human Rights Council that will be making these determinations).

The question that I have is how far will Obama take his destructive Mideast policies? Will he use this doctrine as a hat on which to pin a “final solution” to the Mideast conflict?