The US Constitution Is Not The Only One Obama Disregards

Early in his administration, Obama demonstrated that he would not allow another country's laws to stand in the way of his foreign policy.

Back in 2009 Obama interfered directly with Honduras and its Constitution. As Allahpundit explained at the time:

In a nutshell, Zelaya wanted another term as president so he decided to hold a popular referendum on whether he should be eligible. Minor problem: The Honduran constitution can’t be amended by popular referendum so the country’s supreme court ordered the vote canceled. Zelaya tried to go ahead with it anyway. Literally every other arm of the Honduran government — judiciary, legislature, military — was against him, to the point where the troops who arrested him this morning were evidently acting on a court order. Why such strong, unified opposition? According to one retired Honduran general cited by Fausta, it’s because Zelaya’s a Chavez stooge and him staying on would mean “Chavez would eventually be running Honduras by proxy.”

The response by Hillary Clinton was that regardless of what the Honduran constitution says--removing Zelaya was unconstitutional:

In regard to the illegal detention and expulsion of President Zelaya, this was an act which was unconstitutional and illegal and cannot be tolerated. . . .

Oddly enough, Obama and Hillary Clinton are very selective regarding when they make an issue out of a country's constitution. For example, the Obama administration has said nothing about the fact that Abbas and Fayyad illegally hold their positions in violation of their constitution.

Steven Rosen explains:

First, it will have two rival presidents pursuing incompatible policies. Mahmoud Abbas is presenting himself as the president of the Palestine that is pressing the claim in the U.N. General Assembly, but he is not considered to be the president anymore by Hamas, the largest political party in the putative state. And Hamas has Palestine's own laws on its side in this dispute. Abbas was elected in 2005 to serve until January 2009, so his term has expired. In 2009, he unilaterally extended his term for another year until January 2010 (an extension that also has expired), but that extension did not adhere to Article 65 of the Palestinian constitution, the Basic Law. Hamas, which controls a majority in the now defunct Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), opposed the extension. According to Article 65 of the Basic Law, the legally empowered president of Palestine, since January 2009, has been PLC Speaker Abdel Aziz Dweik, a deputy representing Hamas. Palestine's ruling party, Hamas, considers Dweik, not Abbas, to be the legal president of Palestine, and it has a strong case.

Second, the Palestine that the General Assembly will recognize also will have two rival prime ministers pursuing incompatible policies. Hamas denies that Abbas has the authority to appoint Salam Fayyad as prime minister, because Abbas is not legally the president of Palestine under Article 65 and because Fayyad has not been empowered as prime minister by the Palestinian Legislative Council as required by Article 66 of the Basic Law. Neither his first appointment, on June 15, 2007, nor his reappointment on May 19, 2009, was confirmed by the PLC as required. Hamas, which controls the majority in the PLC, considers the legal prime minister of the Palestinian Authority to continue to be Ismail Haniyeh, a senior political leader of Hamas. Haniyeh was empowered by the PLC to be prime minister of Palestine in February 2006. Abbas dismissed Haniyeh from the office on June 14, 2007, after the Gaza coup, but Haniyeh counters that this decree violated articles 45, 78, and 83 and that he continues to exercise prime ministerial authority under Article 83. The PLC also continues to recognize Haniyeh's authority as prime minister. Here again, Hamas has the law on its side.

Obama has said nothing about this fact and insists that Netanyahu should negotiate a peace agreement with a man who has been out of office for over 2 years, but there is nothing to require the Arabs to keep the agreement.

Yet not one word from Obama or Clinton.
This despite the fact that the situation makes the insistence on negotiation with Abbas look absolutely ridiculous.

And while Obama shows no concern for the Palestinian disregard of their own laws--not a promising sign for people who want to declare their own state--he has no problem making a stink about Israel building homes in East Jerusalem: which had a Jewish population until Jordan illegally annexed it in 1948 and forced out the Jews.

Come to think of it, Obama is not too concerned with the US Constitution either, having declared what many consider to be an unconstitutional war with Libya without approval of the Senate.

Can you see a pattern?

Technorati Tag: Israel and Honduras and Obama.