Republican Sen. Rand Paul intends to introduce legislation next week that would prohibit aid to the Palestinian Authority if it does not explicitly recognize Israel and renounce violence.
The Kentucky senator, who is a strong proponent of cutting foreign aid, including that to Israel, was quoted by The Washington Post as saying, “Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with an entity that does not believe it should exist, and has used terrorist tactics to seek its end.”
Referring to last week’s announcement by Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas that his Fatah faction is reuniting with the rival Hamas terrorist organization, Rand added, “Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with an entity that does not believe it should exist, and has used terrorist tactics to seek its end.”
His bill would give the Palestinian Authority five weeks after formal re-unification to renounce violence and recognize Israel, two conditions that are counter to Hamas’ charter. Abbas has said he does not have to recognize Israel because his predecessor Yasser Arafat supposedly did so. Arafat actually simply acknowledged that the entity of Israel exists.
Abbas, with his miraculous two-tongued mouth, has said he is against violence but backs the right of “resistance,” which is the English translation of the Arab code word for violence.
Abbas also has increasingly praised Palestinian Authority suicide bombers and other terrorists, known to him and his cohorts as “martyrs.”
And why should he go through the motions of recognizing Israel when it is clearly stated on official Palestinian Authority maps that all of Israel, including Judea and Samaria, exists – as Palestine?
But for all of Sen. Rand’s grand plans, his bill might carry as much weight as a Palestinian Authority agreement since it would take effect only after a Fatah-Hamas unity government is formed, and that will take place anytime between six months and never.
It doesn’t matter because Paul’s real intention is to win support from the Jewish voters, especially those with money.
His anti-foreign aid policy has won praise from Americans fed up with Uncle Sam for going deeper into debt while spending their tax dollars for little things like the failed war in Iraq, the failed war on Taliban and the general failure of trying to buy Muslim love with money, which has brought nothing but trouble to the Middle East.
In a visit to Israel last year, he said the time has come to stop chasing bad investments with bad investments, even if it means cutting aid to Israel.
“It will harder to be a friend of Israel if we are out of money. It will be harder to defend Israel if we destroy our country in the process,” he said in Jerusalem. “I think there will be significant repercussions to running massive deficits … you destroy your currency by spending money you don’t have.”
He added, “I’m concerned that some of the weaponry that we are currently giving to Egypt may one day be used against Israel.”
Isn’t it weird that President Barack Obama never thought of that?
Paul’s theory is that cutting military aid to Israel actual is good for Israel since it will make Israel more self-dependent, especially when it comes to responding to attacks.
“I don’t think you need to call me on the phone to ask permission for what you want to do to stop missiles from raining down on you from Gaza,” he said.
Paul also made it clear that that the first targets of foreign aid cuts would be Pakistan, Egypt and other peace-hating countries where Obama his “reached out” to engage them, although it is not clear in what he actually is engaging them except in Russian Roulette with a weighted ball.Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu
About the Author: Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu is a graduate in journalism and economics from The George Washington University. He has worked as a cub reporter in rural Virginia and as senior copy editor for major Canadian metropolitan dailies. Tzvi wrote for Arutz Sheva for several years before joining the Jewish Press.
If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.