If anyone isn’t sure why potential contender for the Oval Office Mitt Romney caused a stir by his remarks about Jerusalem made during his recent visit there, let’s consider the situation in more detail. Please refer to the brief previous post and watch its very short video-clip from Times of Israel. A short US news transcript on this may be read here.
First, let’s never forget the prophetic Word of God:
“I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that sends all the surrounding peoples reeling…On that day when all nations of the earth are gathered against her. I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations. All who try to remove it will injure themselves…” (Zecharia 12:2-3, also referred to in earlier post here.)
Jerusalem is renowned for its place in religious history and since Israel liberated it from Jordan in the 1967 war it has changed from semi-dereliction to a thriving city. Inter-nationally, however, it is regarded as a disputed territory with Israelis and Palestinians vying for eventual oversight through the supposed ‘peace process’. It’s complicated, so let’s check what others more qualified than me say about Romney’s speech:
1. Drew Zahn, a Christian columnist, explains:
The controversy over the nation’s capital exists because many Jews, as well as many of Israel’s supporters around the world, have long understood that Jerusalem is more than just the capital of the country, but the heart and soul of the Jewish people’s understanding of returning to the land of their forefathers.
And even though the presidential residence, government offices, supreme court and Knesset are located in Jerusalem – designated as the capital city by Jewish law – the United Nations doesn’t recognize Jerusalem’s place, and most nations’ embassies, therefore, are located in Israel’s northern city of Tel Aviv. In fact, not a single nation on earth diplomatically recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
Even the U.S., long considered one of Israel’s most faithful allies, has fudged its position on the capital controversy as incoherently as Carney answered the press corps. For example, in 1995 Congress adopted the Jerusalem Embassy Act, a resolution supporting recognition of a united Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and declaring “the United States Embassy in Israel should be established in Jerusalem no later than May 31, 1999.” But the act has yet to be carried out, as President Clinton’s administration believed the act was an unconstitutional invasion of presidential authority. No president has yet to act on the 1995 resolution.(Read full article Suddenly, All Eyes Are On Jerusalem.)
2. Deputy managing editor of the Jerusalem Post and senior fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC, Carolyn Glick has served on the Israeli team during peace negotiations and is highly regarded for her incisive analysis. Thus, on this matter she provides the following insight before proceeding to deal with Palestinian complaints:
…The law granted the president a right to postpone the transfer of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on national security grounds. But the law’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital was unconditional (my emphasis).
In noting Romney’s very mild criticism of Palestinian society, Carolyn refers to their nonsensical attitude on several issues and cites how they bite the hand that feeds them:
The EU is the largest financial backer of the PA. Its policies towards Israel are in complete alignment with what the purportedly moderate Palestinians claim they want in a peace deal with Israel, including the partition of Jerusalem [….] And yet…for simply upgrading EU trade ties with Israel, Palestinian for Dignity announced its members “will organize to protest the latest manifestation of EU complicity and to challenge its presence and operations in Palestine”.
For how the Republican contender’s policy statements compare with those of Barack Obama’s Administration, especially as applied to the re-election campaign, read her full article Israel – Obama’s ‘Wedge’ Issue.
Carolyn’s opinion on Romney’s speech is ever so brief and may been read here just before the speech’s video on her blog.
3. Founder of The Middle-East Forum who warned of the likelihood of the 911 attack, Daniel Pipes referred to Romney’s rousing political speech as follows:
(He) delivered a ‘stem-winder’ of a speech to the Jerusalem Foundation yesterday, packing emotional support with frank policy statements. The contrast with Obama could hardly be more dramatic. Indeed, one could go through the speech and note the many refutations of Obama….
Also, in contrast to the nonsensical Obama administration stance on Jerusalem being Israel’s capital — sneaking into change captions that mistakenly identified it as that and going through verbal gymnastics to avoid calling it that — Romney came out and plainly called Jerusalem “the capital of Israel”.
For Daniel’s concise summation of the speech see his article in National Review Online, The Corner.
4. Mike Evans, close personal friend of PM Netanyahu for many years, tells about the Israeli’s 35 year-long friendship with the Republican Romney in A Tale of Two Kings.
The two politicians are exceptional among today’s officials. It would be challenging to find two men of such prominence with a similar history. It would also be difficult to envision a world leader who would be more in tune with Israel’s welfare. Romney has already signified that he would be hesitant to make noteworthy determinations about the Jewish state without first conferring with Mr. Netanyahu. This would be an utter about-face from the lackadaisical policies displayed by current US President Barack Obama.
Has your mainstream news fully reported on this? See Not on the 10 o’clock News.