No Leniency For Netanyahu
Published in Frankfurter Rundschau
(Germany) on 7 June 2009
by Inge Günther (link to original)
(Germany) on 7 June 2009
by Inge Günther (link to original)
Translated from
by Ron Argentati.
Edited by Katy Burtner.
Good speeches can fall flat, but the one given by Barack Obama in Cairo isn’t in that category. After it appeared the speech might have caught Israel flatfooted, Benjamin Netanyahu has now announced he will deliver a response. It remains to be seen whether and just how far it diverges from the narrow framework provided by his right-wing government. The answer is, probably not very far. Up to now, Netanyahu seems to fear fracturing his coalition more than he does any displeasure from Washington. Putting a halt to the building of further settlements won’t be easily accomplished as long as the settlement lobby has a majority in his Cabinet.
On the other hand, Netanyahu can’t afford any worsening in relations with Washington. Simply put, his main worry is the Iranian nuclear threat to Israel’s existence. Obama may have emphasized that the bond between Israel and the United States in unbreakable, but in Iran’s case, Netanyahu feels nothing can be trusted to replace the security policies of the United Nations apparatus. Especially not if they are willing to keep all options open, including the military one.
But Netanyahu has to avoid a dispute with Obama at all costs. Back during his first term as Israeli prime minister from 1996 to 1998, he made himself unpopular in Washington and ended up paying a price for it. So he really has no alternative other than to blink. In plain language, that means he has to back down from his position to continue building settlements and also from his opposition to the two-state solution. That will hardly become reality overnight; he who backs down too quickly in Israel will be quickly sneered at. But when push comes to shove, other factors may count even more: there is a majority among the Israeli people as there is in the Israeli Parliament that favors a change in course. If Netanyahu decides in favor of a two-state solution, the centrist Kadima party under Tzipi Livni's leadership – still the largest faction in the Knesset - will be brought in as a coalition partner.
The one idea Netanyahu should immediately abandon is that the Obama administration cares much about his coalition problems or his fear of angering Israeli settlers. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also made it clear that she finds no evidence to support Netanyahu’s claim that expansion of the settlements in the West Bank was already approved in a secret agreement with the Bush administration.
Special envoy to the area, George Mitchell, arrives Monday to establish his liaison office in Jerusalem. Mitchell’s credentials include not only the peace he brokered in Northern Ireland, but he is also highly knowledgeable about the West Bank settlement problem as described in his 2001 report. His deputy, General Keith Dayton, responsible for training the West Bank Palestinian police force, can point to his successes in that area. Both are subjects that will certainly be discussed on Tuesday when Mitchell meets with Netanyahu.
Washington won’t let up. Netanyahu has to come out of his bunker. He will hardly be able to come up with a peace plan of his own to replace Obama’s. In this regard, Israel’s right wing is a lot like the emperor’s new clothes.
On the other hand, Netanyahu can’t afford any worsening in relations with Washington. Simply put, his main worry is the Iranian nuclear threat to Israel’s existence. Obama may have emphasized that the bond between Israel and the United States in unbreakable, but in Iran’s case, Netanyahu feels nothing can be trusted to replace the security policies of the United Nations apparatus. Especially not if they are willing to keep all options open, including the military one.
But Netanyahu has to avoid a dispute with Obama at all costs. Back during his first term as Israeli prime minister from 1996 to 1998, he made himself unpopular in Washington and ended up paying a price for it. So he really has no alternative other than to blink. In plain language, that means he has to back down from his position to continue building settlements and also from his opposition to the two-state solution. That will hardly become reality overnight; he who backs down too quickly in Israel will be quickly sneered at. But when push comes to shove, other factors may count even more: there is a majority among the Israeli people as there is in the Israeli Parliament that favors a change in course. If Netanyahu decides in favor of a two-state solution, the centrist Kadima party under Tzipi Livni's leadership – still the largest faction in the Knesset - will be brought in as a coalition partner.
The one idea Netanyahu should immediately abandon is that the Obama administration cares much about his coalition problems or his fear of angering Israeli settlers. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also made it clear that she finds no evidence to support Netanyahu’s claim that expansion of the settlements in the West Bank was already approved in a secret agreement with the Bush administration.
Special envoy to the area, George Mitchell, arrives Monday to establish his liaison office in Jerusalem. Mitchell’s credentials include not only the peace he brokered in Northern Ireland, but he is also highly knowledgeable about the West Bank settlement problem as described in his 2001 report. His deputy, General Keith Dayton, responsible for training the West Bank Palestinian police force, can point to his successes in that area. Both are subjects that will certainly be discussed on Tuesday when Mitchell meets with Netanyahu.
Washington won’t let up. Netanyahu has to come out of his bunker. He will hardly be able to come up with a peace plan of his own to replace Obama’s. In this regard, Israel’s right wing is a lot like the emperor’s new clothes.
Previous article![]( "Obama's New Policy: To Please the Middle East")
Next article![]( "An Explanation of the GM Collapse")
