Why Obama Is Responsible for the Mideast Powder Keg

A crucial choice awaits the president this week.

President Barack Hussein Obama has a choice this week at the United Nations as the Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas calls for a vote on Palestinian statehood, whether or not the vote is actually averted by some sort of Western payoff to the terrorist organization.

As background, it should be noted that it has long been the position of the United Nations that there ought to be a Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza Strip.  So what would change with any such resolution?

Presumably, in any vote, the Palestinians would ask for – and, in the General Assembly, receive – voting rights.  They would also attempt to grab East Jerusalem as their capital, including the Temple Mount, and probably ask to control their own borders.  Given the presence of Hamas in the middle of this proposed deal – and given the history of the PLO itself -- such a demand would create the largest single terror state on the planet.

The Palestinians would leave the so-called “right of return” for another time, a sword hanging over the Israelis’ heads.  They would not solidify the borders of Gaza and the West Bank, allowing them to terrorize Israel further while demanding more concessions.  They would not allow any Jews inside the borders of their new state – no shock, considering that most Arab states ban Jews outright.

If the vote goes forward and the United States shoots down the Palestinian resolution in the Security Council, the Arabs in Palestinian-controlled territories will riot.  They will demand that Israel withdraw immediately from the territories, and they will call on their allies in the Arab world to jack up oil prices to punish the United States.

The long term result could be a move into the Sinai by the Egyptian forces, providing weapons and ammunition to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.  Mahmoud Abbas will form a unity government with Hamas to attack Israel.  Israel will be forced to move into Palestinian-controlled areas and clean out terrorist havens, and the world will condemn them for it.  Many Jews will die – but, as we’ve learned, Jewish blood is cheap for those who live comfortably in Europe.

And, apparently, also for President Obama, who has allowed every anti-Israel, anti-American group in the Middle East to consolidate control of government.  For all of his flaws – and there were many – President Mubarak of Egypt did not allow his military to threaten Israel.  Within the first few months of his departure, however, the Egyptian population has attacked the Israeli embassy and torn down its walls.  The military has begun funneling weapons to the Palestinians.  In Libya, the Obama strategy has allowed a Muslim Brotherhood-led opposition to come close to power.  In Iran, it has allowed the mullahs to crush all legitimate opposition.

The Palestinians believe that they have an ally in President Obama, and they mean to exploit it while he is still in office.  They may delay the vote for a few months if Obama gives them some goodies in return.  But in essence, they know they had best act now.  They realize what has now become obvious: if President Obama had been president in 1948, he would have voted against the establishment of the State of Israel.  To him, Israel is a historic mistake, and were he not bound by electoral politics and an adversarial Congress, he would undoubtedly do more to aid its enemies.

How will all of this end?  The same way it always does.  Time is the friend of the Arab states, and the enemy of Israel.  However the resolution to be introduced at the UN turns out, Iran grows every day closer to a nuclear weapon, which will have only one target.  Each day, the Israeli population dwindles and the Arab population grows in relative terms.  Without the backing of the United States, Israel will not be able to survive future wars.  It will be tough enough to survive the war of words about to begin in New York.