The enemy of my enemy: shifting alliances in the Middle East
The Obama administration’s decision to side with the members of the jihadist axis against Israel by adopting their demand to open Gaza’s borders with Israel and Egypt has served as the final nail in the coffin of America’s strategic credibility among its traditional regional allies.
As the US has stood with Hamas, it has also maintained its pursuit of a nuclear deal with Iran. The US’s position in these talks is to enable the mullocracy to follow North Korea’s path to a nuclear arsenal. The non-jihadist Sunni states share Israel’s conviction that they cannot survive a nuclear armed Iran.
Finally, President Barack Obama’s refusal to date to take offensive action to destroy Islamic State in Iraq and Syria demonstrates to Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states that under Obama, the US would rather allow Islamic State to expand into their territory and destroy them than return US military forces to Iraq.
In other words, Obama’s pro-Hamas-, pro-Iran- and pro-Muslim Brotherhood-axis policies, along with his refusal to date to take effective action in Iraq and Syria to obliterate Islamic State, have convinced the US’s traditional allies that for the next two-and-a-half years, not only can they not rely on the US, they cannot discount the possibility of the US taking actions that harm them.
It is in the face of the US’s shift of allegiances under Obama that the non-jihadist Sunni regimes have begun to reevaluate their ties to Israel. Until the Obama presidency, the Saudis and Egyptians felt secure in their alliance with the US. Consequently, they never felt it necessary or even desirable to consider Israel as a strategic partner…
The partnership that has emerged in this war between Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia is a direct consequence of Obama’s abandonment of the US’s traditional allies. Recognizing the threat that Hamas, as a component part of the Sunni jihadist alliance, constitutes for their own regimes, and in the absence of American support for Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have worked with Israel to defeat Hamas and keep Gaza’s borders sealed.
Most Israelis have yet to grasp the strategic significance of this emerging alliance…
Israel’s strategic cooperation with Egypt and Saudi Arabia owes to their shared interests. It cannot extend beyond them…
Threatened by the axis of jihad, no Muslim government can be seen publicly with Israelis…
The Israeli-Egyptian-Saudi alliance can ensure that all members survive the Obama era.
It becomes increasingly clear that a lot of people are worried about surviving the Obama era.
The phrase I used in the title of this post in often quoted as being of Arabic origin. But it’s not necessarily so:
The proverb the enemy of my enemy is my friend suggests that two parties can or should work together against a common enemy. Although it is often described as an Arabic proverb, there is no evidence of such an origin. The earliest known expression of this concept is found in a Sanskrit treatise on statecraft dating to around the 4th century BC, while the first recorded use of the current English version came in 1884.
A similar expression is “politics makes strange bedfellows.” So does war, at times.
Obama has sided with CHANGE…
since progressives believe that all changes move us forward and progress towards a better world and state, they side with forces that hasten conflict and so, change.
this is all well known if you red Hegel, Adorno, Heidegger, Popper, Horkheimer, Habermas, et al.
given that the new synthesis is always better
it then pays to hasten this new synthesis by siding with the forces that would foment it, over that which would subdue and bring peace… peace means that the coming betterment would take longer
without war and violence and death, the system changes slowly and may not change in the dialectical way… but with such things, it changes fast, and they can impose the direction it goes in, and so, fomenting such issues is a means to an end
“Obama’s pro-Hamas-, pro-Iran- and pro-Muslim Brotherhood-axis policies, along with his refusal to date to take effective action in Iraq and Syria to obliterate Islamic State, have convinced the US’s traditional allies that for the next two-and-a-half years, not only can they not rely on the US, they cannot discount the possibility of the US taking actions that harm them.” Caroline Glick
Ms Glick assumes, hopefully rightly, that America will not elect another leftist democrat in 2016. Obama is IMO as much an enemy of Israel as is Hamas. He just pretends otherwise. But Obama represents the new consensus POV of the democrat party and that POV is not going to dissipate on its own.
Ironically, it is Obama who has convinced Israel that it must survive without American support. IMO, the ‘lesson’ that Israel must have American support, which resulted from the close call of the 1973 Yom Kippur War is what has led to Israel’s unwillingness to deal decisively with Islam.
As for the provenance of the proverb, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”… Amazing. Even a venerable ‘Arab proverb’ turns out to be borrowed…
Even more amazingly, the most basic of Arabic claims to invention and originality; the “Arabic numeral” system that we use, turns out to have been appropriated;
The “Hindu numeral system[2] is a positional decimal numeral system, nowadays the most common symbolic representation of numbers in the world. It was invented between the 1st and 4th centuries by Hindu mathematicians. The system was adopted, by Persian mathematicians (Al-Khwarizmi’s c. 825 book On the Calculation with Hindu Numerals) and Arab mathematicians (Al-Kindi’s c. 830 volumes On the Use of the Hindu Numerals) by the 9th century. It later spread to the western world by the High Middle Ages.”
[my emphasis]
The very stasis that makes Islam incapable of reform also makes it incapable of originality and invention. Perhaps there’s occasionally justice in the world after all?
http://lockerdome.com/6554034429497921/6874545391015956
Re the above link/picture and apropos of Artfldgr’s Progressive Changers: this picture dedicated to all the great philosophical and theoretical determinists through the ages – up to Francis Fukuyama and The End Of History, and the Emile Coué of our time — Steven Pinker. The very notion that evil is not always with us and will play no part in our future is as lethal a dose of toxicant as the concomitant murder cults that seem always their result, whether Bolsheviks, Red Guards, al Queda/ISIS.
And the new synthesis is always better indeed; if the body counts don’t go up the barbarity does. Next time someone has a theory of any sort, neoAryanism, neoCommunism, up to and including ‘multi-culturalism’ — hang him and spare the world another monstrous crime.
The real danger in the short term is Obama refusing to resupply Israel with important weapons. Israel needs to resupply to keep up the fight. I wonder if the current cease fire is a result of such a threat by Obama to force Israel to agree.
John Oh…
Without any doubt Barry Soetoro has done exactly that.
All resupply to Israel has to be routed through the White House at this time.
I rather suspect that Bibi is going to have to reverse engineer the Hellfire missile — on the hurry up.
Israel needs to recognize that relying on American support is a thing of the past under democrat administrations. American jews need to recognize the same thing too or abandon all pretense that they support the existence of Israel.
Ironically, it is Obama who has convinced Israel that it must survive without American support. IMO, the ‘lesson’ that Israel must have American support, which resulted from the close call of the 1973 Yom Kippur War is what has led to Israel’s unwillingness to deal decisively with Islam.
Easiest way for Israel to get off the addiction of American democratic support is for someone to cut it all off.
America’s Pax was maintained by spreading poison, in the form of democracy and multi culturalism, to societies that could no longer unite due to those social problems. No unity, no war. And afterwards, they would rely on American protection forevermore, a convenient way to keep the peace, but very unsustainable.
Of course, it just never worked on the Islamos. They refused to accept democracy and rules.
Just another opinion here, for what it’s woth.
Obama’s foreign and domestic policies are in service to the one promise he made that he has kept. That is to ‘fundamentally transform America.’
Though the incompetence and corruption of this administration is breathtaking, it simply cannot explain all that has transpired.
This is a deliberate policy on the part of this administration and its enablers. In a rational world it could reasonably be called sedition. Possibly even treason, though his actions are not designed to overtly overthrow the government, but instead, to undermine it. Hence his Cloward-Piven strategy.
Obama has focused on this above all else and has worked assiduously to achieve it. When he and the left have had to fight, which to date has been only against domestic political opposition, they have acted with resolution and decisiveness.
Elsewhere in history the hard left has made temporary alliances of convenience with those who are its natural enemies so as to overthrow the existing order. The left in Iran made alliances with the ayatollah’s radicals, thinking they would shove these religious bumpkins aside once the Shah was overthrown. Much to their chagrin, they were beaten and then eliminated.
Today, the hard left in Europe and in our country makes its alliance with radical islamists, with much the same intent, which is to shove them aside once the existing order is brought down and then take over. An uneasy and temporary alliance of convenience. Much like Hitler and Stalin’s non-aggression pact. But never forget Obama’s, and the left’s true enemy is. Also never forget that the freedom we in this country and the west in general take for granted has historically been an anomaly and not the default position. If it is seen as crumbling, there will be many jumping ship from their stated democratic leanings to go with those who are perceived as the winners.
Is it too late to change the tide? Not in my opinion, but the hour is getting late.
Tim P…AMEN..!!
The unforgivable sabotage that He & His have been doing to Israel should be hung forever around the heads of the Democrat Party, very much including the pathetic Hillary when she runs. Israel needs and(duuuhhhh)deserves our uncompromised backing. Policy wise and military supplies by the unceasing ship & plane load. From Israel’s Greatest Friend and Ally in the White House—President George W. Bush—to this punk, saboteur and VTC is breathtaking. Let the friends of Israel in this country(many millions)and especially the Jewish Democrats know in full how horribly this bunch has treated the only democracy in the Mideast.
**VTC** Above: Vast Testicular Concavity.
Obama is the Very Definition. Are we not blessed??
American Jews, except maybe for the Orthodox, don’t give a sheit about Israel. Commentary magazine is about the only conservative Jewish opinion publication of which I know. Jews are Democrats like African-Americans are black.
As Tim P says, America is unique in human annals, but it is a one-off. It is in terminal decline, proof to be found in the death by smothering of the Constitution over the last 150 years. Look at then, look at now, and weep for what we have thrown away, or was seized and taken from us. The Independent Payment Advisory Board of Obamacare is immune to control by the Congress, and will determine what is and what is not “cost effective”. If it ain’t “cost effective”, no one will pay, and it won’t get done. That is but the latest example of multiple existingl tyrannical entities in the Federal Gov’t.
For example, the financial decisions of the Federal Stability Oversight Council (sounds good, huh!) may not be challenged by an affected company in any court in the land. Congress is forbidden (forbidden!) to review the budget of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
We’re done. We’re toast. The toaster may not have quite finished with the great and unique American project, but we’re toast nevertheless. A Republic that we could not keep.
A Middle East question: Why don’t the Saudis attack ISIS? They’ve got a well-equipped airforce, lots of money, and at this point, surely capable airforce personnel. Why is the House of Saud scurrying around like roaches when the light is turned on?
Don C…Yep, Commentary is wonderful. Has been for a long, long time. But also look at JWR. Jewish World Review.
“…not only can they not rely on the US, they cannot discount the possibility of the US taking actions that harm them.”
Good. The World who adored him now knows how ordinary Americans feel. We’ve been harmed by this so-called president every day for 6 years.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend? If they are against Obama they are my friends then.
Don Carlos,
“Why don’t the Saudis attack ISIS?”
I’m going to assume you are serious and that this is a genuine question. Here’s how I understand it.
Please Goggle “who funds ISIS” is a good place to start.
One good article is here.
The crack young staff of ISIS and most of the other good folk who make up the Islamist terrorist movements, are Sunni and more specifically Wahabi (or Salafists). The Wahabi are an ultra-conservative sect of the Sunni branch of Islam.
Here is a Wiki article on them.
It’s a long, sad, sordid, and twisted tale and more than I can write about here.
But it’s a good place to begin.
Then read about the Shiite sect of islam. This is mainly practiced in Iran (Iranians by the way are not Arabs, but Persians), though the majority of the Arab population in Iraq are also Shiites, who were brutally suppressed by the Sunni minority of whom Saddam was a member. Clear as mud so far?
Saudi and Iran are the two rivals for top dog in the region. In addition to all the other threads running through this sad area, what you are seeing is a proxy war between Sunnis and Shiite states for dominance in the region. Hezbollah is the main Shiite terrorist organization. They are a major force in Lebanon and side with Assad in Syria, who is a major client state of Iran’s.
I could go on but there are many far better sources to read up on this than my extemporaneous prattling.
But in short, the Saudis are NOT about to do anything to stop ISIS. They fund and support them.
The question you should be asking is why are we allied with Saudi? Oh wait! Could it be because the Saudis are buying us off? Hmm
One must remember that an enemy of my enemy is not my friend, but may be an ally, for a while.
Heck, TimP I know all about Sunni/Shia. I didn’t know the Kuwaiti pipeline (“Everybody knows” is something only a D.C. elite would say) but pipelines are not the key. The key is the source of the shekels. Oh, yeah, that would be DohaQatar, site of a recent financial and trade summit with all of the Western players there.
The question about the House of Saud remains. There will be only one caliph, and I doubt the Sauds will take a back seat. They have lots of oil, shekels and a well-equipped airforce. The stuff Neo posted indicates Sauds, Egypt and Israel are to some extent cooperating– not just against Shias. IS might nominally be Wahhabi, but Wahhabs have killed one another too…so what? It aint just all about the succession to mohamed.
Don C.
Sounds like you’re all over it.
But I don’t think the Saudis will cut off ISIS until they become a direct threat at home.
Didn’t mean to sound condescending with the “everybody knows”.
And if I’m ever a DC elite, I’ll know for sure I failed in life.
TimP: The “everybody knows” was in a quote from a DC thinktanker in Neo’s citation, not you!
Islam can have only one caliph, and he must rule Mecca and Medina, don’t you think?
Don C,
Oops, I didn’t go back to look.
What happens when one ‘assumes’ I guess.
I agree with you on the item that “Islam can have only one caliph”.
What is curious to see unfold at this point is Israel, Egypt, and Saudi quietly working together to contain Hamas, which is a tentacle of the Muslim Brotherhood which Egypt’s military junta recently threw out of office. They all three have a serious interest in containing fundamentalist islamists.
Then we also see the US who was ready to fund the folks trying to overthrow Assad in Syria (ISIS), now working with Syria and Iran to contain these very same islamists in Iraq. I guess it’s just more of that smart diplomacy this administration’s been bragging about.
What a rat’s nest.
“…they cannot discount the possibility of the US taking actions that harm them….”
Glick is being just a bit cagey here. She should have written (and she knows it):
“…they can count on the US taking actions that harm them…”
It’s already happened. Many a time.
But then what ought one expect from an administration that has “taken actions that harm” the US.
And we ain’t seen nothin’ yet; since Obama, especially following the November elections, is about to go into overdrive.
With only the Supreme Court to stop him (since Congress has proved itself incapable).
Indeed, those Old White Males (and One Black Male) will have to be dealt with….