Treading a fine line
An Israeli PM is always treading a fine line when it comes to dealing with the USA. US Presidents, and especially Barack Obama, are always trying to get Israel to make concessions to the Palestinian Arab side, because they have no leverage or influence on the Arabs because they are uncompromising (and basically anti-American). On the other hand, the Israeli PM must stand firm and show the Americans and the world that Israel is a sovereign nation and cannot be forced to make unilateral concessions, particularly when it goes against Israel's basic interests and particularly if it could cause the breakup of a governing coalition. That is the situation which PM Netanyahu faces today going into the lion's den.
Apparently there was a long (2 hr) meeting between Obama and Netanyahu in the White House today. Flush from his victory in the healthcare debate, Obama may feel that he can throw his weight around a bit and try to force Netanyahu to make more concessions to the Palestinians. In effect, Obama is representing the Palestinians, not what the US President as an honest broker should be doing. We all hope that Netanyahu stands firm, but who knows what the pressures are like and/or what Obama is capable of. Suppose he said to Netanyahu, if you reverse yourself on these building projects (the 1600 units in Ramat Shlomo and the 20 units announced Weds (!) at the Shepherd Hotel site) and institute a building freeze covering East Jerusalem as well, then I'll give a commitment to attack the Iranian nuclear sites! What would you do?
The fact is that in modern times Jews have always been a majority in Jerusalem as a whole and were also in the Old City of Jerusalem until they were expelled by the Jordanian Arab Legion in 1948. Now that Jews returned after the victory of 1967, everyone believes somehow that East Jerusalem was exclusively "Arab," well it never was! Fighting for the principle of Jewish control over all of Jerusalem, including the eastern sections, is a hard task against an embedded prejudice that sees it already as part or capital of a Palestinian State. Why not let these issues be resolved in negotiations with give and take, rather than have them enforced by the world's only superpower by one-sided diktat.
Most former Presidents stated clearly that they cannot enforce a solution on the Middle East, but this President doesn't say that. Frankly, whatever the price we don't want a solution imposed by Barack Obama. Not only don't imposed solutions work, but if Netanyahu did reverse himself it would be a political catastrophe for him, having stated clearly before his departure that "building in Jeruslaem is the same as in Tel Aviv" and also taking a tough stand before the AIPAC conference stating that "Jerusalem is not a settlement, it is our capital." If he reversed himself it would be crossing a red line, it would also likely be the end of his coalition and probably his political career. He cannot do this, and no sensible President who actually wants peace should try to force him to do so. After all Israel is America's strongest ally. The fact that we think that Obama is capable of doing this means that we are in for a difficult ride in the near future.
Apparently there was a long (2 hr) meeting between Obama and Netanyahu in the White House today. Flush from his victory in the healthcare debate, Obama may feel that he can throw his weight around a bit and try to force Netanyahu to make more concessions to the Palestinians. In effect, Obama is representing the Palestinians, not what the US President as an honest broker should be doing. We all hope that Netanyahu stands firm, but who knows what the pressures are like and/or what Obama is capable of. Suppose he said to Netanyahu, if you reverse yourself on these building projects (the 1600 units in Ramat Shlomo and the 20 units announced Weds (!) at the Shepherd Hotel site) and institute a building freeze covering East Jerusalem as well, then I'll give a commitment to attack the Iranian nuclear sites! What would you do?
The fact is that in modern times Jews have always been a majority in Jerusalem as a whole and were also in the Old City of Jerusalem until they were expelled by the Jordanian Arab Legion in 1948. Now that Jews returned after the victory of 1967, everyone believes somehow that East Jerusalem was exclusively "Arab," well it never was! Fighting for the principle of Jewish control over all of Jerusalem, including the eastern sections, is a hard task against an embedded prejudice that sees it already as part or capital of a Palestinian State. Why not let these issues be resolved in negotiations with give and take, rather than have them enforced by the world's only superpower by one-sided diktat.
Most former Presidents stated clearly that they cannot enforce a solution on the Middle East, but this President doesn't say that. Frankly, whatever the price we don't want a solution imposed by Barack Obama. Not only don't imposed solutions work, but if Netanyahu did reverse himself it would be a political catastrophe for him, having stated clearly before his departure that "building in Jeruslaem is the same as in Tel Aviv" and also taking a tough stand before the AIPAC conference stating that "Jerusalem is not a settlement, it is our capital." If he reversed himself it would be crossing a red line, it would also likely be the end of his coalition and probably his political career. He cannot do this, and no sensible President who actually wants peace should try to force him to do so. After all Israel is America's strongest ally. The fact that we think that Obama is capable of doing this means that we are in for a difficult ride in the near future.
posted by Jack Cohen at 1:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home