Bibiphobia
A year ago, Obama was not too thrilled that, politically, Israel had turned further to the right and that Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu, became Israel’s Prime Minister. The American president was dreaming about a grand scheme for the region with the focus of having an America that was closer to the Muslim world, embraced by the Arabs.
For this dream, Israel was an obstacle. Israel under Bibi’s governance — an insurmountable obstacle. Netanyahu represented the opposite of what Obama desired for Jerusalem: a docile leader, who would faithfully follow Washington’s dictates regarding Iran, the peace process, settlement disputes and even the partitioning of Jerusalem. Obama had many aspirations.
This year, Netanyahu has played his cards well and managed to diminish the divergences between the two countries. However, authorization for the new housing projects in Jerusalem has provoked the greatest crisis since 1975, according to the Israeli ambassador in Washington, Michel Oren. In Israel, it is assumed that every policy response that is acceptable to Obama ties Israel’s hands in regard to the Iranian nuclear program, for which we will soon approach an inexorable decision: accepting or averting the bomb. By frightening Netanyahu from America, the White House hopes to be able to slow him down.
However, Obama is confusing wishes with reality: An Iranian nuclear weapon is unacceptable to the Israelis as a whole, not just to its prime minister. Netanyahu’s popularity is high at the polls, with numbers never before seen in a country that savages its politicians, while Obama’s popularity doesn’t even reach 4 percent, the lowest in history. Netanyahu is a credible leader for many Arabs, while Obama has lost much of his credibility.
I don’t know who has more to lose these days. Nonetheless, the one gaining the most is clear: an Iran that’s rubbing its hands together while witnessing the White House quarrel with its main ally in the area. Netanyahu has no strong opponent to replace himself — a fact that Obama should just start accepting.
For this dream, Israel was an obstacle. Israel under Bibi’s governance — an insurmountable obstacle. Netanyahu represented the opposite of what Obama desired for Jerusalem: a docile leader, who would faithfully follow Washington’s dictates regarding Iran, the peace process, settlement disputes and even the partitioning of Jerusalem. Obama had many aspirations.
This year, Netanyahu has played his cards well and managed to diminish the divergences between the two countries. However, authorization for the new housing projects in Jerusalem has provoked the greatest crisis since 1975, according to the Israeli ambassador in Washington, Michel Oren. In Israel, it is assumed that every policy response that is acceptable to Obama ties Israel’s hands in regard to the Iranian nuclear program, for which we will soon approach an inexorable decision: accepting or averting the bomb. By frightening Netanyahu from America, the White House hopes to be able to slow him down.
However, Obama is confusing wishes with reality: An Iranian nuclear weapon is unacceptable to the Israelis as a whole, not just to its prime minister. Netanyahu’s popularity is high at the polls, with numbers never before seen in a country that savages its politicians, while Obama’s popularity doesn’t even reach 4 percent, the lowest in history. Netanyahu is a credible leader for many Arabs, while Obama has lost much of his credibility.
I don’t know who has more to lose these days. Nonetheless, the one gaining the most is clear: an Iran that’s rubbing its hands together while witnessing the White House quarrel with its main ally in the area. Netanyahu has no strong opponent to replace himself — a fact that Obama should just start accepting.
Next article![]( "Obama’s Triumph")
