Blinken Is Blackmailing Israel
Blinken's coercive diplomacy insults our ally
President Biden's rhetorical support for Israel had originally emerged as a beacon of moral clarity and commitment to duty, particularly in an era where political convenience often triumphs over principles and duty. In doing so, he has driven a wedge between himself and his State Department, especially in the face of opposition from the progressive wing of his party. Despite his subordinates echoing his support for Israel's right to self-defense, his administration has shown alarming hostility towards the Israeli government. In the shadow of Mr. Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, akin to a cat in the night, employs coercion and diplomatic blackmail against Israel. His actions are evidence that the goal of the State Department is to undermine and upend the Netanyahu-led right-wing government, surreptitiously ushering in a new leftist one.
Israel finds itself at the mercy of Mr. Blinken’s maneuvers, who has exercised no restraint in informing Israel how to conduct its policy of self-defense during and after the war. His propositions for “peace” would involve transferring Judea and Samaria solely to the Palestinian Authority, which is effectively powerless, held captive by Hamas and other terror groups, and forbidding Israel from having any sway over the fate of Gaza, where from where these attacks originated. These onerous conditions, leveraged in exchange for continued military and humanitarian aid, would be arbitrarily imposed on Israel and greatly interfere with its government’s ability to defend itself. It is remarkable how Mr. Blinken exercises such strict authority over Israel, an ally, by imposing draconian directives in exchange for relief, while not exerting similar pressure on Iran, our adversary.
There can be no equivalency, blindness, or ignorance to the fact that the Israelis were brutalized. Women raped. Entire families were butchered. Infants slaughtered. Yet, for unexplainable reasons, rather than stand with its beleaguered ally, the State Department seems intent on rewarding the Palestinians with a new state; not just confined to Gaza, but to other Israeli territory. In this war, Israel is not battling to give the Palestinians another country; they are in an existential fight for their own.
The idea that Palestine can self-correct itself with a state is a naïve and dangerous fallacy, that has played out before. When Gaza last held elections, in 2005, rather than peace and stability; we saw the ascendancy of Hamas, courtesy of an angry electorate. Hamas ignited a brutal civil war against the Palestinian authority’s ruling Fatah party, highlighting the violence that has come to define Palestinian politics. Violence drives Hamas, and fear of violence drives Fatah; as exemplified by the failure of President Bill Clinton's two-state deal. Mr. Clinton meticulously crafted a deal, offering the Palestinians virtually everything they sought. Yet, Yasser Arafat walked away at the last second, driven by a deep-seated fear of assassination.
This anti-Israel approach is not a new development. It harkens back to the Obama administration, where Mr. Blinken served as Deputy Secretary of State to John Kerry. His conduct was so concerning, that even the bipartisan maverick, Senator John McCain, gave a speech warning about the dangers of Mr. Blinken's foreign policy approach. “This individual has actually been dangerous to America and to the young men and women who are fighting [for] and serving it.” Mr. McCain warned, declaring him as “at worst, anti-strategic.”
A myopic tendency towards empowering adversarial forces has defined this administration’s State Department. The Blinken-brokered prisoner swap and “humanitarian pause” will do nothing but grant Hamas a strategic respite to reorganize for further belligerence while Israel loses its military momentum. Negotiating with terrorists is always a gambit fraught with peril, yet this equivalency, treating Hamas as a quasi-state rather than a terrorist group, is the result of a State Department led by an appeaser and staffed with anti-Western sympathizers. Rather than sacking those who denounce our ally, specifically five hundred who signed a letter denouncing his conduct, Mr. Blinken decided to instead placate them by exercising harsh control over Mr. Netanyahu.
In the larger chess game of Middle Eastern politics, Mr. Blinken has directed funds towards Iran, and indirectly Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, and the Houthis in Yemen. By outright refusing to enforce sanctions, Mr. Blinken has bolstered a regime that poses a major threat to the United States. Popular uprisings against the regime have been quelled by the regime. Mr. Blinken’s conduct appears to prioritize the interests of the Mullahs in Tehran over the noble people of Iran, whose efforts to liberate themselves from a tyrannical government often go unaided. Often, both Mr. Blinken and Mr. Biden, speak about the “Palestinian people’s right to dignity and self-determination” and, amazingly, spare no comment for the similarly legitimate rights the Iranian people hold.
One wonders whether the State Department’s conciliatory conduct towards the regime in Tehran is less ideological but rather the result of foreign subversion. The appointments of Robert Malley and Ariane Tabatabai, both revealed to have troubling connections to the Iranian regime, are incredibly alarming. Mr. Malley was given a chief negotiation role with Iran, despite being under an FBI investigation for ties to Iran’s intelligence services, and eventually had his security clearance revoked for mishandling classified intelligence. Ms. Tabatabai retains her security clearance, despite being named as a recruit in a covert influence operation by Tehran’s foreign ministry, per leaked documents1. Could Mr. Blinken's state department be compromised by Iranian agents? If true, such an infiltration would be more consequential than the infamous Alger Hiss case.
This State Department lacks a coherent strategy to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions and its failure to enforce sanctions has compromised the security of our troops, harmed our allies, and has emboldened our adversaries, in the Middle East and beyond. Mr. Blinken's tenure as Secretary of State is characterized by concessions to terrorists, a retreat from the global stage, and disregard for American internal security. His diplomatic malpractice compromises the United States' security and standing when strength and clarity are needed most.
https://www.semafor.com/article/09/25/2023/inside-irans-influence-operation