Powered by WebAds

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Obama and Netanyahu: Ugly confrontation from Day One

Amnon Lord argues that the Obama administration - probably based on misguided advice by Israel 'experts' Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod - has sought confrontation with Prime Minister Netanyahu since Day One. But Obama's overbearing pressure on Israel has backfired: Israelis now hate Obama (have you all noticed that?).
OBAMA AND his people thought that concentrated pressure on the settlements issue would do the trick - split the Israeli political system and society wide open and plunge the country into sociopolitical crisis. Toward that goal they had access to a vehicle that no ordinary ruler has in a conflict, whether with an adversary or an ally: Some of the leading voices and commentators in Israel harbor pathological hatred toward Netanyahu and are willing to collaborate in psychological warfare against the Israeli government. Because the settlements are not a consensus issue either in Israeli society or among Israel's friends in America, the Obama people thought they could create a rift between Israel and American Jewry.

Obama's calculations were wrong. Although the Israeli public is far from unified on the settlements, and many would dismantle them if this was needed for a final peace agreement, there is broad agreement with three current Netanyahu positions. First, the nuclearization of Iran is of the utmost urgency and may require military action. Second, the Palestinians have thus far proven incapable of establishing their own state based on the requisite security regime and implementation of the rule of law, meaning that any territory ceded to them will turn into a terrorist base and eventually fall to Hamas. And third, any Palestinian state that is ultimately created must not pose a threat to Israel.

By endorsing Palestinian statehood with these preconditions, Netanyahu in his Bar-Ilan University speech closed the last gap that separated him from most of the Israeli public. The public, which is not infatuated with Netanyahu, nevertheless rallied to his side because the unique and disproportionate pressure directed at Israel at this juncture in its history reeks of appeasement. The way Obama fixed upon Israel as an ugly vehicle for rapprochement with the Muslim world was simply too transparent.

Thus Obama, who initially was much admired by many in Israel, has failed in his attempt to create a political crisis here and instead reaped a harvest of hatred. These days he is despised in Israel, with his lack of moral fiber regarding Iran and the elections putsch there adding fuel to the fire. Both his policy toward Iran and that regarding Israel have exposed US weaknesses.

One outcome now emerging is a rapprochement between Israel and Egypt. Both countries are concerned about sharing a border with an Islamist fundamentalist regime in Gaza; both feel threatened by Iran; and both are disturbed by the destabilizing effect of Obama's initiatives in the region and elsewhere. Thus one positive outcome of the developments of the past couple of months is Egypt and Israel hugging each other tightly in the dark.
Read the whole thing.

I should probably add that while the Israeli public is not unified on 'settlements' generally, it is unified on Jerusalem remaining our undivided capital, on retaining the Golan Heights, and probably also on retaining the 'settlement blocs,' as well as other areas deemed vital to Israel's security.

When you start asking Israelis specific questions about what they're willing to give up, you will find that there are more and more places they will not cede to the 'Palestinians.'

What could go wrong?

1 Comments:

At 1:15 PM, Blogger NormanF said...

There is no partner on the other side. Obama doesn't appear to grasp it - if in fact there was one, American pressure upon Israel would be redundant. The confrontation Obama instigated with Israel was pointless, unnecessary and counter-productive.

Hopenchange, any one?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google