Obama Is Israel's Enemy!
Two weeks ago, as soon as the information leaked to Netanyahu about the potential agreement between the P5+1 and Iran regarding Iran’s nuclear program, the Israeli prime minister was actually furious. He was apoplectic in his statements about Israel’s current standing; he berated American Secretary of State John Kerry over the phone. It is not an exaggeration to say that Obama, and Kerry along with him, turned from friends of Israel into enemies.
The rapport between Netanyahu and Obama has never been good. Obama cannot forget that during the presidential election, Netanyahu took positions that implicitly supported Obama’s rival, Mitt Romney. He cannot forget that Netanyahu is constantly working to steer Zionist pressure groups in America toward positions against Obama. Moreover, Netanyahu shows the Israeli electorate his toughness toward Obama in years of stalling and refusal to comply with American protestations regarding the necessity of a settlement freeze. Likewise, he refuses to put forth any concessions to realize a breakthrough in Palestinian-Israeli negotiations.
The information that made rounds through Israeli newspapers regarding the particulars of the potential agreement between Tehran and the P5+1 was leaked by Netanyahu’s office. That information indicates that Iran will stop the enrichment of uranium to 20 percent, but that Iran will be allowed to enrich uranium to 3.5 percent for civilian purposes. The number of centrifuges used to enrich uranium will be cut, but they will not be dismantled. Instead, they will be merely “frozen” [as the rest of the deal takes effect]. The United States takes on the task of disposing of the surplus uranium from this very difficult operation in Iran, which will cost anywhere between $2 to 5 billion. The United States will also lessen the sanctions against the trade of valuable goods to Iran.
Netanyahu is making his belief known that this potential agreement is extremely bad because it is good for Iran and it provides sanctions relief before the cessation of the nuclear program, the purpose of which is to build a bomb. The leaks speak to the fear of Obama abandoning Israel and Israel’s security. Likewise, it tells us that Israel is considering striking Iran’s nuclear facilities alone!
In the end, we can say that the crisis of American-Israeli relations has reached a point not seen for decades. We can also say that this crisis bodes well for “actual” Arab countries, as well as the solidification of the American position against Netanyahu and his stalling regarding the settlement freeze, and for the subject of negotiations and Palestine overall.
But there are things that weaken this hypothesis:
First: The perception of many of Washington’s Arab allies that any agreement with Tehran is undesirable, that it is paramount that Tehran remain pressured by American threats and the economic blockade, and that there be no more pressure on Netanyahu regarding the Palestinian issue.
Second: The position of the Palestinian Authority on the continuation of negotiations concurrent with continuing settlement activity as per what is known as “Kerry’s deal.” This is what absolutely prevents any outside support for the Palestinian position either by pressuring Washington or pressuring Israel.
The basic difference between Iran’s standing and that of Palestine is this: Iran merely had to change the form of its political rhetoric and media image toward Washington and the West. Palestine is now barred from any weapon in its negotiation, including peaceful protests against the practices of the occupation à la the methods of the Arab Spring. We can recognize the difference between the mentality of self-defeat and the mentality of victory in all of the changes in Iran and its scheme to dominate the region.
The rapport between Netanyahu and Obama has never been good. Obama cannot forget that during the presidential election, Netanyahu took positions that implicitly supported Obama’s rival, Mitt Romney. He cannot forget that Netanyahu is constantly working to steer Zionist pressure groups in America toward positions against Obama. Moreover, Netanyahu shows the Israeli electorate his toughness toward Obama in years of stalling and refusal to comply with American protestations regarding the necessity of a settlement freeze. Likewise, he refuses to put forth any concessions to realize a breakthrough in Palestinian-Israeli negotiations.
The information that made rounds through Israeli newspapers regarding the particulars of the potential agreement between Tehran and the P5+1 was leaked by Netanyahu’s office. That information indicates that Iran will stop the enrichment of uranium to 20 percent, but that Iran will be allowed to enrich uranium to 3.5 percent for civilian purposes. The number of centrifuges used to enrich uranium will be cut, but they will not be dismantled. Instead, they will be merely “frozen” [as the rest of the deal takes effect]. The United States takes on the task of disposing of the surplus uranium from this very difficult operation in Iran, which will cost anywhere between $2 to 5 billion. The United States will also lessen the sanctions against the trade of valuable goods to Iran.
Netanyahu is making his belief known that this potential agreement is extremely bad because it is good for Iran and it provides sanctions relief before the cessation of the nuclear program, the purpose of which is to build a bomb. The leaks speak to the fear of Obama abandoning Israel and Israel’s security. Likewise, it tells us that Israel is considering striking Iran’s nuclear facilities alone!
In the end, we can say that the crisis of American-Israeli relations has reached a point not seen for decades. We can also say that this crisis bodes well for “actual” Arab countries, as well as the solidification of the American position against Netanyahu and his stalling regarding the settlement freeze, and for the subject of negotiations and Palestine overall.
But there are things that weaken this hypothesis:
First: The perception of many of Washington’s Arab allies that any agreement with Tehran is undesirable, that it is paramount that Tehran remain pressured by American threats and the economic blockade, and that there be no more pressure on Netanyahu regarding the Palestinian issue.
Second: The position of the Palestinian Authority on the continuation of negotiations concurrent with continuing settlement activity as per what is known as “Kerry’s deal.” This is what absolutely prevents any outside support for the Palestinian position either by pressuring Washington or pressuring Israel.
The basic difference between Iran’s standing and that of Palestine is this: Iran merely had to change the form of its political rhetoric and media image toward Washington and the West. Palestine is now barred from any weapon in its negotiation, including peaceful protests against the practices of the occupation à la the methods of the Arab Spring. We can recognize the difference between the mentality of self-defeat and the mentality of victory in all of the changes in Iran and its scheme to dominate the region.
Previous article![]( "New US Ambassador Will Put Communication Powers To Use")
