While all of the Big Three networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) had tried to sow fear for President-Elect Donald Trump’s shifts on foreign policy in the past, they conveniently overlooked a potential major policy reversal from President Barack Obama Thursday. “The Obama administration was going to abstain from voting against a resolution critical of Israel, breaking with the Israel position on this for quite some time here,” reported Fox News Correspondent Rich Edson on Special Report.
The United States often steps up and vetoes any anti-Israel policy put forward in the U.N. Security Council, but apparently not this time. “This particular resolution would have demanded Israel halt settlement construction in East Jerusalem and elsewhere,” Edson said.
And to add to the confusion Secretary of State John Kerry failed to give a scheduled statement to the press regarding the stalled peace negotiations. “That never happened after Egypt pulled the resolution and announced an indefinite delay in the vote,” Edson added, “Reuters reports pressure from Israel and the potential to alienate the incoming Trump administration forced the delay.”
John Kirby, a spokesperson for the State Department, told Edson and the rest of the press the U.S. doesn’t telegraph its position before a Security Council vote, but said, “We have been clear about our position on settlements and the degree to which we don't find them to be constructive to the overall cause of peace.”
Which is consistent with Kerry’s previous statements, as quoted by Edson, “Now earlier this month, Secretary of State John Kerry says he ‘cannot accept the notion that Israel's settlements are not a barrier to peace.’”
On Twitter and in official statements, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urged the U.S. to stay true to its commitments to the state of Israel. Edson noted that if the United States had abstained from the vote it would have broken with Trump’s official position, and would have possibly put him in a bind when he took office.
And with a bit of news that would send the liberal media up the wall, like after Trump talked with the president of Taiwan, Edson concluded:
A Trump transition official tells us that the president-elect did speak with Egypt's president this morning about moving forward on a way on a Middle East peace process. Of course the president-elect might catch criticism there in that the Obama administration is still occupying the White House.
The way in which the liberal media professes its outrage at Trump’s foreign policy shifts exposes their bias against him. They flipped out over Trump’s congratulatory phone call, but appeared to not care less for Obama potentially turning his back on one of America’s greatest allies.
Transcript below:
<<< Please support MRC's NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>
FNC
Special Report
December 22, 2016
6:09:46 PM EasternSHANNON BREAM: This is a Fox News alert. Tonight, a potential foreign policy nightmare for President Obama, President-Elect Trump, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Correspondent Rich Eisen is at the State Department to tell us all about it. Good evening Rich.
RICH EDSON: And good evening Shannon. And in a major U.S. policy reversal, the Obama administration was going to abstain from voting against a resolution critical of Israel, breaking with the Israel position on this for quite some time here. This is all according to Reuters.
Usually the United States will protect Israel from these types of votes. This particular resolution would have demanded Israel halt settlement construction in East Jerusalem and elsewhere. An Associated Press reporter tweeted this morning saying Secretary of State John Kerry was planning to make a long awaited statement on the Middle East peace stalemate at 11:30. That never happened after Egypt pulled the resolution and announced an indefinite delay in the vote.
Reuters reports pressure from Israel and the potential to alienate the incoming Trump administration forced the delay. Despite the report the State Department refuses to say how the U.S. would have voted.
JOHN KIRBY: We just don't preview our view in advance of votes inside the U.N. Security Council. We have been clear about our position on settlements and the degree to which we don't find them to be constructive to the overall cause of peace.
EDSON: Now earlier this month, Secretary of State John Kerry says he “cannot accept the notion that Israel's settlements are not a barrier to peace.” And last night, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tweeted, quote, “The U.S. should veto the anti-Israel resolution at the U.N. Security Council on Thursday.” The State Department says Kerry this morning discussed the resolution with Netanyahu. Officials refuse to provide more detail on that conversation before the vote was postponed. Netanyahu again urged the United States to remain consistent.
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: Israelis deeply appreciate one of the great pillars of the U.S.-Israel alliance, the willingness over many years of the United States to stand up in the U.N. and veto anti-Israel resolutions. I hope the U.S. won't abandon this policy.
EDSON: Now, had the U.S. let this vote move forward and had abstained from voting against the resolution, the United States would have broken with Israel and the incoming Trump administration. The president-elect himself tweeted last evening that the U.S. should reject this vote.
Also, a Trump transition official tells us that the president-elect did speak with Egypt's president this morning about moving forward on a way on a Middle East peace process. Of course the president-elect might catch criticism there in that the Obama administration is still occupying the White House. Back to you, Shannon.
