The French Disconnection
Vol: 46 Issue: 20 Wednesday, July 20, 2005
French President Jacques Chirac is to meet Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Paris on July 27 for talks concerning Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. Sharon is going at the invitation of Jacques Chirac, a first since Sharon took office five years ago.
In the invitation, dated June 7, Chirac praised Sharon’s “determined and courageous decision” to withdraw from the Gaza Strip. Chirac promised Sharon that he would ‘be by his side’ (presumably so he won’t have to stretch while twisting the knife in Sharon’s back)
“More than ever, France and its European partners want to be at your side so that this withdrawal sparks a positive dynamic and that Israel and its neighbors can benefit at last from the peace and stability to which all aspire,” Chirac wrote.
Let’s stop for a moment and revisit the Gaza Strip withdrawal plan. As with all things relative to Israel, the Israeli government plans one thing, the world hears something else, and then expects Israel to conform to their expectations.
Following months of broken promises and unrelenting attacks emanating from the Gaza Strip, Sharon decided to just pull out unilaterally and let the Gaza Palestinians sink or swim on their own.
This was intended as a punitive measure, and, if Sharon had followed through as intended, Gaza would be far too preoccupied with its own problems to constitute a threat to Israel.
The prospect horrified the Palestinian Authority, which is another reason to believe Sharon’s plan, as originally conceived, was tactically sound. Immediately, the Road Map for Peace Quartet charged in, led by the French, to simultaneously applaud Sharon’s withdrawal, and to impose conditions that caused Sharon’s plan to backfire in his face.
Instead of anarchy in Gaza distracting his enemies, a growing anarchy within Israel is forcing him into a corner.
The Quartet, led by the French, forced Sharon to ‘coordinate’ with Abbas in order to ensure a ‘smooth transition’ of power, turning what had been a tactical offensive move into a humiliating military defeat. Sharon was committed to the withdrawal, but the Quartet handed all the best cards to Abbas.
Not only did the French ‘initiative’ on behalf of the Quartet stick a bayonet into Sharon’s back, it handed global terrorism a resounding victory.
Noted this morning’s al-Jazeera; “However, some analysts believe that, whether Israel like it or not, the atmosphere that will prevail during the evacuation process will certainly show Israel as a defeated state, while the Palestinians celebrate and reap the fruits of their armed resistance.”
Whenever I hear the phrase ‘wolf in sheep’s clothing’, my mind’s eye immediately conjures up a picture of Jacques Chirac. Chirac’s invitation to Sharon brings to mind the line; “Come into my parlor, said the spider to the fly.”
Chirac heads what is arguably the most anti-Semitic country in Europe, and is the most consistently anti-Israeli when it comes to interpreting ‘progress’ in the increasingly European ‘road map to peace’.
While the United States, to its credit, is putting ‘pressure’ on Abbas to curb the violence, the European Union has been reserving all its criticism for Israel.
Only a week ago, the EU’s Javier Solana expressed renewed criticism for the OTHER part of Sharon’s unilateral disengagement plan, the barrier fence between itself and the West Bank. Sharon’s plan was to leave Gaza behind its existing barrier fence, fence out the West Bank, and put an end to terror by walling the terrorists out.
The only part of the Sharon plan endorsed by the EU is the withdrawal of Israeli settlements from Gaza. Solana, arriving for talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders, said the EU was against the Jerusalem segment for the same reason it opposed the larger West Bank project — because it cuts into ‘occupied’ land.
(‘Occupied?’ Until the 1993 Oslo Agreement, it was part of Israel, annexed under the international rules of war. Prior to 1967 it was ‘Jordan’ before Jordan tried to annihilate Israel in the Six Days War. Currently, it is home to Palestinian terrorists who are sworn to Israel’s total destruction. To the European Union, it is ‘occupied’ land. The people that captured it in a defensive war are the ‘occupiers’ and a people [who never owned it] and are trying to take it away from them by force are the ‘occupied’.)
“We think that Israel has the right to defend itself but we think that the fence which will stand outside the territory of Israel is not legally proper and it creates also humanitarian problems,” he told reporters in Jerusalem.
Solana appears less concerned about the ‘humanitarian problems’ caused by suicide bombs or the humanitarian problems inherent in creating a terrorist state sworn to Israel’s destruction on her borders.
Neither the Palestinians or Hamas have formally recognized Israel’s right to exist, and Hamas exists, by charter, for the expressed purpose of annihilating Israel.
Here is an overview of the situation. Ariel Sharon is headed to a meeting with his most disingenuous enemy among the nations of the EU, who, as an organization, have made it known that their sympathies lie with Israel’s most implacable enemies in the Arab world.
The European Union has made it a matter of policy to replace the United States as the principle peace broker between Israel and the Arabs, and a war-weary and besieged George Bush may well decide to give way to the pressure.
After all, the principle reason the terrorists give for their jihad with America is Washington’s unwavering support for Israel. If the French want to take on the burden via the EU, why not let them? Let the French face their own weapons that they’ve been pouring into the Middle East for the past decade.
That certainly seems to be the direction things are moving. The US has already begun to cave in and acquiesce to some of the EU-backed demands, like shifting the starting point for negotiations to the 1947 UN Partition Lines.
The prophet Zechariah predicted that in the last days, Jerusalem would not only become the focal point of global attention, he described it as a burdensome stone, and prophesied that ‘all who burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces.’
One can hardly dispute the accuracy of Zechariah’s prophecy insofar as the recent experience of the United States is concerned.
It seemed unthinkable even five years ago, but the Bible indicated that the principle negotiator in the last days would be a ‘prince’ of the old Roman Empire who would ‘confirm’ an existing seven-year peace deal that would usher in the 70th week of Daniel.
One by one, the pieces of the puzzle continue to fall into place. I don’t know who the antichrist is, and I don’t think he does, either. I am not looking for the antichrist, I am looking for the return of Christ for His Church.
At the speed with which events are continuing to unfold, I don’t think we will have much longer to wait.