ANTONY BLINKEN HAS NOTHING TO TEACH US EXCEPT TO DO THE OPPOSITE: ERIC LEVINE
Original column
Americans are legitimately outraged by the cover-up of President Biden’s cognitive infirmities. We still do not know who actually was running the country. However, after reading former Secretary of State, Antony Blinken’s recent op ed in the Wall Street Journal, Recognizing a Palestinian State Is a Rebuke to Hamas, we can only hope that an infirm President Biden — incoherence, incapacities, and all — called the shots. Blinken’s essay is a delusion, predicated on fallacy, based on a fantasy.
Everyone should remember that during his tenure as America’s leading diplomat, Blinken got absolutely everything wrong. From the catastrophic surrender in Afghanistan, to the appeasement of Iran, the alienation of Saudi Arabia, the attempted rehabilitation of Nicolas Maduro, the pathetic response to Putin’s preparation for and invasion of Ukraine, the opening of America’s southern border to any thug, terrorist, or human trafficker willing to make the trip, and the slow motion betrayal of Israel (just to name a few), Blinken’s State Department left the world a far more dangerous place than the one it inherited.
Yet, despite his unblemished history of utter incompetence and ineptitude, he felt the need to “educate” us on how best to foster the creation of a Palestinian State and create an “enduring, peaceful, and secure coexistence” between Israelis and Palestinians. His prescription for peace only makes sense if one ignores history and reality.
Blinken takes issue with the decision by France, the U.K., Canada, and Australia to unilaterally recognize a State of Palestine. He claims the establishment of Palestine should be “conditions based.” Unfortunately, the conditions he envisions make his proposal indistinguishable from that of our allies. Blinken’s plan only delays the day the world, with American support, establishes a terrorist Palestinian State.
As with every plan for the creation of a Palestinian State, Blinken’s approach is predicated on the false assumption that the Palestinians have an interest in a two-state solution. The fundamental reason there is no Palestinian State is because there has never been, and there is not now, any legitimate Palestinian leader or organization willing to recognize the existence of a Jewish State of Israel living in peace and security within internationally recognized boundaries. Had there been, the Palestinians could have had a state in 1948, 2000, 2005, or 2009.
The fact remains that since Israel’s creation in 1948, Palestinian leadership has demonstrated it is only interested in a single state: an Arab state with no Jews or one with a subjugated Jewish minority.
Blinken attempts to deal with this reality like any good Democrat, by blaming the Israelis. Rejecting a role for Hamas in any future Palestinian government, he envisions a “reformed” Palestinian Authority governing the new state.
[Israel] must support the reform of the Palestinian Authority instead of trying to undermine it, which lets Israel claim it has no negotiating partner.
The statement is delusional. Mahmood Abbas, the President of the PA, is in the nineteenth year of his four-year term. No one prevented him from calling new elections over the past fifteen years. He chose not to hold elections because he believed (correctly) that he would be defeated by Hamas as he was in Gaza in 2005. Blinken simply choses to ignore that a majority of Palestinians support Hamas.
The reason Abbas refused to accept the establishment of the Palestinian state in 2009 that President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered to him, was because it required Abbas to agree to end the struggle to destroy the Jewish State of Israel. That outcome was unacceptable not just to him, but to a majority of Palestinians living in Gaza and Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) as well.
Instead, he rejected the offer and adopted the policy of “pay to slay.” The PA pays families of terrorists who are killed or put in jail by Israel for murdering its citizens. Incredibly, Blinken helped fund this program during his time in the Biden White House. Blinken conveniently glosses over that reality.
Blinken was Secretary of State for four years. One would think that by now he would be able to identify an alternative to Abbas or Hamas with whom Israel could negotiate. It is telling that no one comes to mind.
He attempts to sound evenhanded by conceding it would be unreasonable to expect Israel to agree to the creation of a terrorist state on its border dedicated to its destruction. Wow, what a visionary.
Recognition should also be conditions-based. While Palestinians have a right to self-determination, with that right comes responsibility. No one should expect Israel to accept a Palestinian state that is led by Hamas or has independent armed militias, that aligns with Iran or others that reject Israel’s right to exist, that educates and preaches hatred of Jews or Israel, or that, unreformed, becomes a failed state.
Blinken’s reference to Iran is particularly noteworthy. It was an open secret that Iran funded, armed, and trained Hamas and helped plan the October 7 attack. Yet, Blinken was among the strongest advocates in the Biden White House for appeasing Iran, not enforcing sanctions against the Islamic Republic, and granting billions of dollars in sanctions relief knowing the money would find its way to support Iran’s terrorist network including Hamas.
I leave it to you, the readers to determine for yourselves if Blinken deserves any of the blame for the October 7 attack.
It also should be remembered that Blinken’s childhood friend, Robert Malley — who was the lead negotiator for the Biden Administration in its failed efforts to persuade Iran to rejoin the JCPOA (the Iran nuclear deal) – was fired and lost his security clearance because of classified information he leaked to the Iranians. To this day, the American public does not know what he leaked. Moreover, Malley has not been prosecuted and Blinken has helped cover up Malley’s malign behavior.
Blinken has forfeited any moral authority and is no position to tell the Israelis anything about how they should defend themselves.
Undaunted, Blinken states:
Addressing these conditions over the next three years – a reasonable time frame – can show Israel and the world that an independent Palestine will be focused on building a state, not destroying Israel.
Again, he fails to say who will be responsible for addressing these conditions beyond the generic “Palestinian.” With whom is Israel supposed to work to “address” Blinken’s conditions? The absence of a legitimate interlocutor for the Israelis highlights why Blinken’s brainstorm is a non-starter.
He also fails to say precisely what those conditions objectively are. There are no specific metrics for the Palestinians to meet. Beauty is simply in the eye of the beholder.
What if the Israelis are not persuaded the conditions are met but France, the U.K., Canada, and Australia are? Does that mean the State of Palestine will be recognized? What metrics will the United States require? What are the consequences for the Palestinians if they fail the Blinken challenge?
Blinken attempts to give Israel comfort by saying the Americans will protect them.
The United Nations Security Council is the appropriate organization to judge whether the Palestinians meet the conditions, and America’s veto would reassure Israelis.
The assertion insults the intelligence of every living human being. Putting aside that the United Nations is a cesspool of antisemitism and anti-Israel hate, given the state of the modern Democratic Party, no responsible Israeli leader would ever agree to this insanity. The United States is one election away from betraying Israel and recognizing a Palestinian State. It would already have done so if Kamala Harris had won the election.
Israel’s existence is a message to the world that the destiny and security of the Jewish people will be determined by the Jewish people. It will not be decided by Zohran Mamdani, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, AOC, the Squad or the other antisemites that dominate and are ascendant in the Democratic Party.
All is not lost, however.
Blinken frequently uses the term “self-determination” interchangeably with the concept of statehood. They are not necessarily one in the same.
For example, the Kurds have an independent enclave in Iraq that satisfies the definition of “self-determination” with no independent state. Puerto Ricans exercise self-determination in Puerto Rico but they do not have a state of their own.
Perhaps the best model for Palestinian self-determination is the United Arab Emirates. There, a collection of clans (the various emirates) exercise self-determination within their own enclaves but ultimately pay allegiance to Mohammed bin Zalman the leader of the UAE. No clan gets its own state.
The semblance of the UAE model is already taking form in Gaza. Israel has been supporting and, in some instances, arming clans in Gaza that oppose Hamas. These groups are more interested in the future of their fellow Gazans and have abandoned the goal of destroying the Jewish State. That movement is likely to gain traction.
Blinken also falsely assumes all Gazans want to stay in Gaza. Given the opportunity, a significant portion of the population — like their brethren in other Arab countries have done — will choose to leave voluntarily. If France, the U.K., Canada, and Australia and the Arab world are so concerned about the wellbeing of the Gazans, let these countries take them and offer them a better life. That does not appear to be an option for Blinken. For him, this is the Jews burden alone.
Antony Blinken was a failed Secretary of State in a failed Administration. He has nothing to teach us other than to do the opposite of what he suggests.
Comments are closed.
