Caroline Glick
Caroline GlickHezki Baruch

Political analyst and journalist Caroline Glick, who harshly criticized Prime Minister Naftali Bennett's inability to stand up to the new US administration, explains to Arutz Sheva the insights into Bennett's policy she gained from his speech to the UN General Assembly earlier this week.

Glick states at the outset that the prime minister's speech not only did not change anything about her criticism of him, but on the contrary, only served to strengthen it. "The great threat to Israel these days from Iran is reflected in the unwillingness of the US administration to do anything active to prevent Iran from crossing the last line towards independent nuclear capability. Instead of dealing with it in a real way, that is, militarily, the US administration is doing everything to resume the nuclear talks with the Iranians, which will lead to American and UN legitimacy for an Iranian nuclear arsenal."

In this reality, Glick emphasizes, "Naftali did not say anything about it. He did not condemn, not even a little bit, the dangerous nuclear agreement. On the contrary, his defense minister said that Israel was fine with the American talks leading up to the nuclear agreement."

"In practice, the policy of no longer opposing a US return to a nuclear deal paves the way for Iran to become a rich nuclear power because all economic sanctions will be lifted and the Iranian plan will also receive a UN seal even though it was developed illegally.

On the American request from the Chinese not to buy oil from the Iranians, Glick says that it has no meaning. "What does this government say about the cooperation agreement between China and Iran? Nothing. What is it doing about the Biden government that released one of the heads of the Huawei company in exchange for two Canadian hostages held in China? Our government does nothing and the Biden administration does nothing. At the same time, he is doing nothing against China or Iran."

"The Americans are now pursuing Iran and pressuring Israel to approve the opening of an American consulate in eastern Jerusalem, which means revoking American recognition of Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, and the government does not oppose it in public, if at all. Bennett did not defend any Israeli interest. An Israeli leader is expected to advance Israeli interests around the world, but he spoke to the UN, the most powerful anti-Semitic organization in the world, as friends. What are these friends when there is an automatic majority in the UN for any anti-Semitic and anti-Israel proposal. He was in the most anti-Semitic hall on earth and treated it as if he were in an Israel-friendly hall. He spoke about the Durban conference and did not mention that it was a UN conference. It is good that 34 countries have boycotted it, but he did not say that it should not have happened and did not preach morality to the UN for initiating these things. He had to demand from the international community that they stop coming down on Israel, which is sovereign in the Land of Israel and in Jerusalem."

Glick states that she is not holding Bennett to a higher standard than his predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu. "I demand that he represent the interests of Israel. He did not represent Zionism and Israel. He did not defend us against our most bitter enemies, Iran and the Palestinians. He did not preach morality to anyone when we are fighting for our right to exist."

In her remarks, Glick returned to the basic criticism she hurled at the prime minister and his government: "This illegitimate prime minister, who blackmailed his way to being prime minister for his six seats, contrary to everything he represented, is without any legitimacy. 95 percent cannot stand his being prime minister. He got there and did not bother to represent the country he wanted to be prime minister of, so what is he prime minister for?"

"He talks about the government representing the entire people, but that [government] excludes his own voters. In addition, he did not represent his voters or the people of Israel. So what did he represent? His position against Sharon Alroy Preis and the Ministry of Health. He said how nice it is that the Likud is not in power and that he is in power with the Muslim Brotherhood and Meretz, that is what he said. He said nothing of criticism against the international community that gives legitimacy to the Iranian nuclear program. He did not present any pro-Israel stance. If our patience has run out, why did Benny Gantz say last week that Israel would live quietly with the United States' return to an agreement that will give Iran a nuclear arsenal?"

Glick adds: "Lapid and Gantz said about a month and a half ago that within 70 days Iran will pass the point of no return, so what are they waiting for? Where is the defense of Israel? Where is the move to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons? In the previous government every Monday and Thursday there were moves on nuclear facilities in Iran, and in this government nothing happens because we do not want to surprise the Americans. It gives the United States a veto right over our activities."