A STRATEGIC AND ESCHATOLOGICAL IMPERATIVE

This week (ending December 3, 2005) in Washington, D.C., the United States and Israel, after a three-year hiatus, resumed their Strategic Dialogue. This is differentvery different. Something far more significant has commenced between the two allies facing the likes of a burgeoning insurgency fed by an Iranian President who insists that ISRAEL MUST BE WIPED OF THE MAP and a resurgent Syrian-Hezbollah-Hamas (Baathist Socialist-Shiite-Sunni) alliance whose intentions mirror those of Irans Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a World Without Zionism (Haaretz).

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev claimed the Strategic Dialogue had broken off for logistical reasonsnot because tensions over upgrading Israels Harpy anti-radar aerial drones, originally purchased by China in the mid-90s under Ehud Baraks regime, were the actual cause of the estrangement (Israel sent the degraded drones back to China; ipso facto, its time to strategize (PINR)). Frankly, the US and Israel are harping about something else . . .

IRANS NUCLEAR PROGRAM MUST BE WIPED OFF THE MAP

Targeting March of 2006, IDF Military Intelligence Chief, Major General Aharon Ze'evi, and Ariel Sharon have given official notification: Israel is not apt to abide the diplomatic ineptitude of the French, Germans, and British with the Iranians in stemming the inevitable WMD and the delivery systems now in place to fulfill the visions of Ahmadinejad, Osama ben Laden, and Zarqawi on behalf of Israellet alone the aspirations of democratic reforms fashioned by Egypts Islamic Brotherhood (BBC)!

If by the end of March 2006, the international community (i.e., the inane efforts of the British, French, and Germans) does not manage to use diplomatic means to block Iran's effort to produce a nuclear bomb, there will no longer be any reason to continue diplomatic activity in this field, and it will be possible to say that the international attempts to thwart [Iran's efforts] have failed, Ze'evi said. (December 2, 2005, Haaretz)

Indeed, the pivotal Brits (perennial toadies of the US-Israeli Axis) have no need to fear a politically defunct EU aghast at what an attack on Iran might engender throughout the Moslem Worldat least not according to John Laughland in ICH:

Will an attack on Iran put unacceptable strain on Euro-Atlantic relations? Will Britain be forced further onto the horns of the dilemma it has striven to avoid, namely to be forced to chose between the US and the EU? No. US and British policy has ensured that the EU will itself be in such turmoil over the next year that it will not be able to respond in any meaningful sense to a new act of Anglo-American aggression.

As the watch and see Israelis reach maximum vulnerabilitythe US-Israel special relationship may, like the Syrian-Iranian Defense Pact of early 2005 (Fox News), evolveby necessityinto a far more sinister tool of Western colonial imperialism. The Moslem Worldand think not that I stereotype all Moslems into that worldis fixated, notwithstanding the ineffective fringe of moderate-secular Islam, upon the awful and inevitable prospect:

THE US-ISRAEL DEFENSE PACT

This is a huge enchilada to swallow; thence, we shall dismember this wildebeest in four stages: (1) The nature of such a Defense Pact; (2) The circuitous route through Israels history its taken; (3) Allies behind the pact; and (4) The eschatological imperative embedded within an ultimate security agreement between the US and Israel (let alone the scores of nations who will sign on to such an arrangement). No, I dont wish to sound presumptuously prophetic; however, if you still cant see the elephant in the picture (having been mesmerized by the white crane taking a free ride atop the pacaderm) then let me disabuse you of your preposterous pigeon-vision perspective and get a bit stereoscopic: BEHOLD, THE ELEPHANT COMETH!

First, lets be clear, the aforementioned strategic dialogue between the USA and Israel is designed to put Iran on notice: The Elephant Cometh. Secondly, theres no need to hide the obviousnothing like putting the whole world on notice, for were about to see the wave peak: The Sea Change Cometh!

Now, Herr Hitler in Mein Kampf said he intended to kill the Jewsgrief, he meant what he said. Well, today you have Radical Islamicists (who need little doctrinal platform from the Koran to launch their aspirations)double grief, they intend to Wipe Israel off the map. Next, you have the Commercial West, led by the political chutzpah of the USA and the shock and awe of historys most awesome military machine ever to countenance the planetunder girded by the recalcitrant Bush Doctrinean amalgam of victorious democratic enforcement, buttressed by the Judeo-Christian-Evangelical-Zionist-Neocons, with the corporate elite picking up the rear, hoping theyll get the contracts from this hyphenated juggernaut and the oil from not only Iraq, but also Iran et al.

Forgive, but at this juncture, the altruistic peaceniksyou know, the Air-head America Radio typeswho have the supercilious notion that a unilateral and immediate pullout of American troops from Iraq and the entire Middle East, along with keeping international accords and the like, will somehow regain American stature and alleged credibility in the world. Look, lets just cut to the chase: The US Congress has spoken401 to 3. Were staying put!

The Israelis and the US know that their strategic-special relationship is not built on thin airbut upon a host of platitudes: Shared values; Judeo-Christian beliefs; Cold War allies; pioneer spirit (settlers); only democracy in the Middle East; over a million Israelis holding dual US citizenship (approximately of the nation); both are terrorized by terroriststhe same ones; Israels identification with the West, ad nausea, ad infinitum. Whoops, and as the Moslem World sees it: Shared Western decadence and heretical religious affirmationsright smack in the midst of the 10/40 Corridor, the Holy Land which Saladin et all took fair and square from the Crusaders way back when!

Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the deepening and strengthening of ties with the United States has always been a central, essential issue in Israeli foreign and defense policy. In this context, the possibility of establishing a formal defense pact with the United States has arisen from time to time . . . since the end of the Cold War and with the progress made in the peace process, some complex elements have been added . . . it is clear that the nature of such a pact in the current period would be significantly different from one during the Cold-War era (Yair Evron, Jaffe Center for Strategic Studies-Strategic Assessment).

This only gets more specific . . . as Mr. Evronway back in October 1998outlines the reasons for such a Defense Treaty between Israel and the U.S. (minor editing):

1. When Israel-Syria negotiations are resumed, a defense pact is likely to serve as part of American compensation, offered in exchange for Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights, or within the framework of American guarantees for developing a package of security measures, which would undoubtedly constitute a central component of such an agreement.

2. The subject of a defense pact might also arise within the context of the possible leakage into the region (Note: Veiled allusion here to, at the time, Iraq, and assuredly Iran and even Syriamy edit) of nuclear materials or weapons from Russia . . . a defense pact would be likely to moderate or preclude the development of dangerous conditions.

3. Assuming the peace process continues, it is likely that a regional security system will be established; an important component of this regime would be (predicated) on (an) Israeli-U.S. defense pact.

Again, Mr. Evrons perceptions regarding such a defense pact clearly grasps the overall strategic understanding between the USA and Israel; however, if you wouldstrategic peculiarityof a defense pact occupies an above and beyond all Memoranda of Understanding, all elements of the existing strategic alliance between the two, and, most definitely, all existing military-cultural-religio affinities to wit:

The idea of a defense treaty arose again in the 1970s and in the 1980s. During the Cold War period, the U.S. viewed Israel as a strategic asset and a stabilizing influence in the region . . . Israel clung to this perception in the hope that mutual strategic interests would serve as a foundation strong enough to formalize defense relations between the two countries, despite the absence of a solution to the problem of the territories occupied in 1967. The 1982 Lebanon War and the continuation of the regional conflict, however, prevented such formalization, and it appeared that the U.S. would not be prepared to protect Israels borders if those borders included the occupied territories. In the absence of a formal defense treaty, Israels status was defined, for the first time, as a Non-NATO Ally in early 1987. (ibid. Yair Evron)

Be very clearthe U.S. and Israel know perfectly well what such a DEFENSE TREATY entails. During the Peres government (and, who knows, sounds like Sharon-Peres will have a government again if their Kadima party wins in March, 2006same time that Iran gets the bomb) in 1996 Israel pressed for just such an accord. But, that expectation was placed on the back burner when Netanyahu took over as Prime Minister.

BARAK CLINTON AND THE DEFENSE PACT

Never mind, Ehud Barak, strolling around Camp David with President Clinton back in 2000 knew precisely the cost of such a DEFENSE PACT. Bruce Riedel, Clintons Special Assistant for Near East and South Asian Affairs on the National Security Council spelled out the financial ramifications and parameters of the elusive pact in an article found on bitterlemons.org.

Riedel spent time with Baraks aides, Danny Yatom and Zvi Shtauber, in formulating the defense agreement and the compensation package that Israel would receive if they structured a peace deal with the U.S. Riedel related how the Israelis came to Camp David preparedthey placed a draft of the DEFENSE AGREEMENT on the table along with a detailed list of financial and security requests (Aluf Benn, Haaretz). Now, listen how Aluf Benn puts it:

According to Riedel, Barak wanted a contractual format for the strategic relations between the U.S. and Israel, which had developed substantially over the years but lacked a formal dimension. His proposal was to sign an agreement in which the U.S. would agree to come to Israels aid in the event of future attacks and then get the pact ratified by the American Congress and the Knesset.

Is that clear enough? O.K. lets spell it out:

(1) $15 Billion in American aidprimarily upgrading the IDF

(2) $10 Billion to compensate the Palestinians

(3) $10 Billion for building desalination plants in Israel, the Palestinian state and Jordan

TOTAL: $35 Billion

Ultimately, the befuddled Riedel pondered . . .

Two years after Camp David (2002) the tragedy of the missed opportunity that the summit presented is clearer than ever. Imagine a Middle East without the Intafada and with a peace agreement buttressed by an enormous reconstruction fund, akin to the Marshall Plan that President Truman used to rebuild Europe after World War Two (ibid. Aluf Benn).

PERES AND THE ELUSIVE US-ISRAEL PEACE PACT

Remember, the 82-year old Peres has wanted a US-Israeli Defense Pact for a long timepositioning himself in the new Sharon-Peres Alliance provides ample space to conclude such a pact.

Please view full article/graphics/links @ http://www.the-tribulation-network.com