Israel Matzav

A lose-lose situation

In the New York Jewish Week, Abraham Foxman asks whether the United States is open to compromise with Israel over the 'settlements' issue.

As time goes by, however, and meeting after meeting takes place in Washington, Jerusalem, London and again in Jerusalem, the issue still goes unresolved and the gap between the U.S. and Israel takes on larger meaning. The Israeli government, which after all is a right-wing group committed ideologically to the settlement enterprise, has made significant concessions from its perspective. It has agreed in principle to dismantle the illegal settlements and not to expand existing ones on new land beyond the boundaries of existing settlements. But this has not been good enough. Washington seems to be eager to squeeze out every last ounce of Israeli resistance on the subject by rejecting not only the concept of natural growth but even of Israel completing structures in midstream.

As the disagreement drags on, the impact goes beyond the subject of settlements. Now the Obama administration’s approach begins to raise a series of more fundamental questions: Is the historic special relationship between the two countries being eroded? Is the administration’s outreach to the Muslim world predicated on distancing the U.S. from Israel and putting pressure on the Jewish state? Are the unrelenting U.S. demands on Israel regarding settlements giving the Palestinians an excuse to avoid direct negotiations with Israel, the only path toward real peace? Is the continuing focus on settlements creating the perception around the world that the U.S. now agrees with Israel’s critics that it is Israeli policy that is the critical obstacle to peace?

If the administration denies the points embodied in these questions, the only way to demonstrate that is to be open to a compromise with Israel on the settlement issue. Such a move will send a very different message to Israel, the Palestinians, the Arabs and the world than it has been sending until now.

...

Continuing the tension over settlements will only produce a lose-lose situation. Israel will feel more insecure and be less willing to consider concessions; Palestinians will feel less of a need to make critical decisions; Arabs will be no closer to getting the Palestinian issue off their agenda and focusing on the Iranian threat. Resolving the problem, on the other hand, can begin to free the process that ultimately can be a win-win proposition, for Israelis on one side and Palestinians and Arabs on the other.

Unfortunately, the answer to every one of Foxman's questions in the second quoted paragraph above is yes.

Yes, the historic special relationship between the two countries being eroded. Yes, the administration’s outreach to the Muslim world is predicated on distancing the U.S. from Israel and putting pressure on the Jewish state (and Obama said as much in his meeting with the 'Jewish leadership that Foxman attended). Yes, the unrelenting U.S. demands on Israel regarding settlements are giving the Palestinians an excuse to avoid direct negotiations with Israel, the only path toward real peace. Just ask Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen. Yes, the continuing focus on settlements creating the perception around the world that the U.S. Obama administration now agrees with Israel’s critics that it is Israeli policy that is the critical obstacle to peace.

The entire 'settlement' issue has been bouncing back and forth since shortly after Obama's Cairo speech. We are alternately told that the sides are reaching a compromise and then that the American position has not budged since Day One. The 'reaching a compromise' stories are inevitably coming from Israel, while the stories about the US not budging are inevitably sourced from the State Department or the White House. My sense is that Senator Mitchell would actually like to reach a compromise, but the President won't let him.

And most American Jews couldn't care less. F**k the Jews - they'll vote for us anyway.

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:12 PM