Only Moscow Can Help Obama Save the Middle East
Published in Rossiskaya Gazeta
(Russia) on 29 September 2010
by Vladislav Vorobev (link to
original)
Never before has a U.S. president so clearly been a hostage of the Palestinians and the Israelis simultaneously. Barack Obama has only five days left to remedy the situation, and Moscow alone can help him win back his reputation as a diplomat on the global level.
These meager phrases, which last week leaked out into the corridors of the U.N. General Assembly's 65th session, made it even more evident that on Sept. 26, Israel would not extend the moratoriums on building its settlements on the West Bank of the Jordan River. Nevertheless, everyone was waiting for a miracle until the last minute. The miracle, however, did not occur.
On Sept. 27, construction machinery started up again in the disputed territories. The Israelis immediately defied the myth that its country has no better friend than Washington.
It is not a secret to anyone that Obama — who was involved in a mediation mission in the direct Palestinian-Israeli negotiations that started in the American capital on Sept. 2 — judged that it was of primary importance to resolve domestic policy problems. In November, he will have to make it through extremely difficult Congressional midterm elections, in which Republicans will most likely be able to take revenge.
Successful Palestinian-Israeli negotiations could help Democrats tone down the fervor of those critics who are showing the American voters that for a year and a half of his presidency, Obama did not manage to gain one domestic policy victory. Pre-election positioning for power in the U.S. is very well understood in Israel, but they do not want to help Obama. Nevertheless, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was strong enough to explain himself to Washington. Admittedly, it was not with the head of the White House, but with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It was evident that Netanyahu had nothing to say to Obama, whom he overtly circumvented. The Israeli prime minister called on Clinton. “They are usually quite direct with each other." Philip Crowley, the official State Department spokesman, told journalists a little later.
In the meantime, Avigdor Lieberman, the Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs, voiced Israel's new position to the public: "...[N]ine months the Palestinians wasted time and completely refused to accept this gesture. They are just wasting time." Netanyahu gave the impression that he is ready to continue negotiations.
The Palestinians also refused to play the role of White House allies. The leader of the Hamas movement, Khaled Mashaal, called the three rounds of direct Palestinian-Israeli negotiations occurring up until Sept. 26 "public offerings." He explained his thought thus: "Every U.S. president during his first term promises the Palestinians and the Arabs that he will work towards the formation of a Palestinian state, but the result is always the same — the presidential term ends and nothing happens."
The head of the Palestinian national administration, Mahmoud Abbas, is for now making a less aggressive statement: "We do not want to stop these negotiations, but if the settlement continues, we will have to stop them." Moreover, he gave the impression that a final decision will not be made any earlier than Oct. 4, after the League of Arab States voices its position.
In this situation, who can help Washington try to avoid the next foreign policy fiasco? The European Union? Hardly. After all, like the Americans, the Europeans have forced themselves into a corner, having refused to carry on a dialog with all of the Palestinian political structures at the proper time. That leaves only Russia who could preserve close contact with both Fatah and Hamas. In fact, Moscow's relations with Tel Aviv have been developing at a rapid pace recently. Not coincidentally, Crowley announced to journalists, "We’ve been in close consultations with the Russians as a member of the Quartet and we’ll continue that involvement."
These meager phrases, which last week leaked out into the corridors of the U.N. General Assembly's 65th session, made it even more evident that on Sept. 26, Israel would not extend the moratoriums on building its settlements on the West Bank of the Jordan River. Nevertheless, everyone was waiting for a miracle until the last minute. The miracle, however, did not occur.
On Sept. 27, construction machinery started up again in the disputed territories. The Israelis immediately defied the myth that its country has no better friend than Washington.
It is not a secret to anyone that Obama — who was involved in a mediation mission in the direct Palestinian-Israeli negotiations that started in the American capital on Sept. 2 — judged that it was of primary importance to resolve domestic policy problems. In November, he will have to make it through extremely difficult Congressional midterm elections, in which Republicans will most likely be able to take revenge.
Successful Palestinian-Israeli negotiations could help Democrats tone down the fervor of those critics who are showing the American voters that for a year and a half of his presidency, Obama did not manage to gain one domestic policy victory. Pre-election positioning for power in the U.S. is very well understood in Israel, but they do not want to help Obama. Nevertheless, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was strong enough to explain himself to Washington. Admittedly, it was not with the head of the White House, but with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It was evident that Netanyahu had nothing to say to Obama, whom he overtly circumvented. The Israeli prime minister called on Clinton. “They are usually quite direct with each other." Philip Crowley, the official State Department spokesman, told journalists a little later.
In the meantime, Avigdor Lieberman, the Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs, voiced Israel's new position to the public: "...[N]ine months the Palestinians wasted time and completely refused to accept this gesture. They are just wasting time." Netanyahu gave the impression that he is ready to continue negotiations.
The Palestinians also refused to play the role of White House allies. The leader of the Hamas movement, Khaled Mashaal, called the three rounds of direct Palestinian-Israeli negotiations occurring up until Sept. 26 "public offerings." He explained his thought thus: "Every U.S. president during his first term promises the Palestinians and the Arabs that he will work towards the formation of a Palestinian state, but the result is always the same — the presidential term ends and nothing happens."
The head of the Palestinian national administration, Mahmoud Abbas, is for now making a less aggressive statement: "We do not want to stop these negotiations, but if the settlement continues, we will have to stop them." Moreover, he gave the impression that a final decision will not be made any earlier than Oct. 4, after the League of Arab States voices its position.
In this situation, who can help Washington try to avoid the next foreign policy fiasco? The European Union? Hardly. After all, like the Americans, the Europeans have forced themselves into a corner, having refused to carry on a dialog with all of the Palestinian political structures at the proper time. That leaves only Russia who could preserve close contact with both Fatah and Hamas. In fact, Moscow's relations with Tel Aviv have been developing at a rapid pace recently. Not coincidentally, Crowley announced to journalists, "We’ve been in close consultations with the Russians as a member of the Quartet and we’ll continue that involvement."