A No-Conspiracy Theory: The Goings-On in Washington Look Preplanned

What did Obama say? That an agreement with the Palestinians, if and when it’s signed, will have to be based on the 1967 lines with border adjustments? Is there an Israeli or Palestinian who does not know that this is what’s going to happen?

If I believed in conspiracy theories and far-sighted leadership wisdom, I would think that all the developments taking place in recent days between the Israeli prime minister and the United States president had been planned in advance: Obama’s seemingly revolutionary speech, the firm response from “Bibi,” the bitter disagreements between the two great friends. For isn’t it true that when we get down to the nature of things, this is all an argument over nothing? Perhaps, think those who wish to believe that leaders do not argue about anything, everything is preplanned and designed to prepare our public opinion for the next big move that’s just around the corner? Because if not, woe to us!

What did Obama say? That an agreement with the Palestinians, if and when it’s signed, will have to be based on the 1967 lines with border adjustments? Is there an Israeli or Palestinian who does not know that this is what’s going to happen? Has there been any other game in town since the Six-Day War, or especially since Clinton’s outline was made public eleven years ago? Doesn’t even someone who is opposed to the arrangement, which is a completely legitimate stance, know what he’s up against?

Is there an Israeli who doesn’t know that at the end of the day there will be either an agreement with a government representing all Palestinian people or no agreement at all? Is there anyone able to integrate our original statement prior to the Fatah-Hamas reunion — which said that Abu Mazen does not represent the Gaza Strip and, therefore, there is no sense in parleying with him — with the new statement, which says that there is no reason to talk with Abu Mazen now that he does also represent Gaza, when that includes representing Hamas, who is in control there? Even one who opposes the arrangement, which is, again, a perfectly legitimate stance, cannot deny this simple logic.

I’m convinced that most of the Israelis understand that and, therefore, find it hard to get excited about the apocalyptic interpretation of the president’s address. This same majority also knows that the United States wouldn’t impose something on Israel that we won’t want. On the contrary, in that same speech, Obama strongly attacked the Palestinian threat to unilaterally declare statehood. With the Quartet offering their support for Obama’s speech as well, leading European countries will have to follow suit.

Nothing will happen during Netanyahu’s visit to Washington

I wish, you tell yourself in light of the hysteria, that the whole thing had been staged. I wish, on the eve of his visit to Washington, Netanyahu had told the president: “You know, we’ve got domestic political constraints: Lieberman, Danny Danon, etc. Why don’t we make up a crisis about nothing? Let’s scare the Israelis with the only thing that penetrates the thick shell enveloping the exilic infantilism of their consciousness: dire straits with America. Let’s stage a terrible argument between us. I’ll look strong, analysts will warn of an impasse with our benevolent patron — and all of us will gain.”

But we all know this is not so. All of us know that instead of reacting positively to the president’s speech and emphasizing Israel’s commitment to peace and everything the two parties still have to go through, Netanyahu was startled by the explicit words “1967” — as if there is any other possible outcome.

Indeed, it is not only Netanyahu being like that, but every Israeli who is involved in the discourse. Only last week, the best commentators here were engaged in a heated discussion over the idea that Bibi himself had brought up this detestable date, as if we are still in Golda’s* days and the consensus is that there are no Palestinian people whatsoever. We all know that in reality it is 2011, but the internal debate in Israel, along with the prime minister’s frame of mind, are stuck somewhere around 1971.

But don’t worry; nothing horrible will happen during Netanyahu’s visit to Washington despite reports of cold shoulders between the two heads of state and scrupulous interpretations of their body language. To the same degree, the commentaries apropos the Jewish vote and contributions that will wave good-bye to Obama are not meaningful either. There is also talk recently regarding the president’s hopes of fund-raising one billion dollars in donations, after he only managed to mobilize hundreds of millions of dollars from individual contributions four years ago.

Should the American economy improve, Obama will remain president until 2016 and Republican dropouts from the presidential race know that. The hopes from the left are ridiculous as well; the chances are slim that anything will be forced on us or the Palestinians.

The only important thing is the passing time, the deteriorating condition of Israel in the world and the people from both sides whose blood may be spilt. While we continue to deal with this nonsense, and Ehud Barak interprets Obama’s speech correctly, but still continues to provide an umbrella to Netanyahu under the poor pretext that this issue matters, time continues to advance and it is not working in our favor. And that’s a situation that even a presidential address cannot change.

*Golda Meir: the fourth prime minister of Israel and the “Iron Lady” of Israeli politics.