I am not naive.  I realize that the reasons people are showing opposition to Benjamin Netanyahu’s scheduled speech to the U.S. Congress are at least partially based on an anti-Israel sentiment.  That being said, I am somewhat pleased as to what has transpired.  First of all, I am all for the concept of smoking out the enemy, so to speak.  I don’t necessarily believe that those boycotting the speech are automatically the enemy of Israel, but if nothing else they are the enemy of common sense.

The most high-profile politician to state that he will not be attending the speech is Vice President Joseph Biden.  Not that I ever saw him as a credible candidate anyway, but should he declare himself as running for president in 2016, it’s good to know that not only can Israel not count on him when needed, but that he didn’t even have the character to admit it openly and honestly.  Biden’s reason for not attending the speech is “a scheduling conflict”.  I guess when an administration has chosen to dumb it down  for this long, why stop?  No reason to stop insulting our intelligence now.

It just so happens that there is a solution to all of these so-called political maneuvers.  That solution is rescheduling.  The only thing not to be rescheduled should be the Israeli elections.  As of now everything seems to be running in 2 week intervals, with the elections smack in the middle.  Bibi’s speech is scheduled for March 3, Israel’s elections for March 17, and an outline for an agreement with Iran for March 31.  If the president is sincere about all of these issues then the best solution is the following.   Reschedule the target date for the proposal with Iran for one month later and reschedule Bibi’s speech for after the Israeli elections.  In doing so it would appear as though everyone is getting what they want and the accusations of politics being injected into a crucial security issue can be dismissed.  That would be great were it not for one very important factor.  Politics is always part of the equation.

First of all, despite the fact that I, as a supporter of Benjamin Netanyahu appreciate Boehner pushing for the speech, I also am aware that he has spent most of his time over the past 6 years fighting this administration.  Therefore it is clear that in circumventing the White House he gains satisfaction and at least in his mind some political gain.  That being said, of all the important issues surrounding this matter, Boehner’s tactics are the least important, and the least dangerous.  There are 2 other parties that are happy keeping things exactly as they are today and have far more impact on our future.

The first party that wants today’s status-quo to remain intact is the current President of the United States.  Whether it is out of a Chamberlain-like mentality of appeasement or the extreme view some hold that this is some master plot to destroy the U.S. as we know it, the president seems to want to make a perceived nuclear deal with Iran part of his legacy.  Common sense would dictate that it makes no sense to negotiate nuclear deals with a nation that not only sponsors worldwide terrorism but calls on the destruction of Israel and its allies in the west, but unfortunately the only way any of this makes some sense is if we believe those in charge are dangerously naive or that they have the very worst of intentions.  Should the rescheduling take place, calling the Obama administration’s proverbial bluff, I have no doubt that we would find that when all is said and done this has very little to do with whether or not the American political structure impacted Israel’s elections.  I am confident the opposition to the speech would remain.

The second party I see resisting a rescheduling of events is Iran.  It makes more sense that Iran would prefer to keep Netanyahu in power than to see Israel run by a more liberal and pacifist government.  No one in their right mind believes Iran is honest about their intentions, and should an Israeli government be elected that is willing to capitulate to Iran even in some fashion, Iran’s bluff would be called as well. Israel could have a government that would openly declare the willingness to do anything they want for peace, and Iran would still declare their desire to wipe Israel off the map.  So with a more conservative Netanyahu-lead government, Iran can continue its international deception of being a country dedicated to peace.

Regardless of anything else that happens, the one thing all the hoopla surrounding the speech has given us is a clear picture of where everyone stands in future U.S. elections.  Since Iran is a threat to American and Israeli security, I hope all those with a vote realize the larger statement being made by those putting a misguided policy ahead of what keeps all of us safe.  That statement seems to be that sleeping with the enemy is more important than working with your friends.  A very concerning and ultimately tragically dangerous approach.

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

CLICK TO JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK