NETANYAHU AND MAYBE OBAMA TOO - JUST DON’T GET IT

The much vaunted reconciliation between Obama and Netanyahu did not end in kumbayah but in chaos. The shambles created by Netanyahu’s dramatic breach of diplomatic faith, by allowing an East Jerusalem housing development to go forward, overshadowed the thousand pound gorilla in the room - where is Obama going on Iran, which is Israel’s burning priority. Like it or not, Obama’s approach to Iran is considered by many as a barometer as to his how much his administration supports Israel. Correspondingly, like it or not, Israel’s settlement behavior is regarded as the gauge of their sincerity in pursuing a two state solution. This has become such a deafening benchmark of Israel’s bona fides that is recognized by a coalition of liberal Israelis and liberals everywhere, concerned governments and the European Union and anti-semites. Ironically, the only nations not screaming the odds are most of the Arab Gulf States, Jordan and Egypt - perhaps they know something!

NETANYAHU

For all the Israeli Prime Minister’s apprenticeship, spending his formative years in America and its politics, he still does not get it. He does not get it on two levels. After all that has transpired he still cannot fathom that the bellwether of Israel’s good faith as to the creation of a two state solution, is not the fact that they are civilized island of democracy in a sea of insanity and brutality, but whether or not they construct settlements in areas that everyone perceives could become part of the Palestinian State, that he, Netanyahu purports to endorse. Maybe he believes that that marker is unfair, hypocritical and not realistic, but it is what it is.  

His second lapse from reality is his perpetuation of his childish feud with Obama. Literally, childish, because, regardless of Bibi’s ego, Obama is the adult in this relationship in so far as he has the control and power. Didn’t Netanyahu go to daddy Obama during the recent Gaza affair and ask for a replenishment of arms and ammunition? Didn’t Netanyahu request from daddy Obama close on three hundred million dollars to repair “The Dome” which daddy Obama had built him? Didn’t daddy Obama provide much needed diplomatic support during the ongoing war? 

It is time to call this infantile rebellion off! If Netanyahu wants to be treated like an adult he must behave like one. This conduct has been ongoing. It started ironically enough by the announcement of a Settler Housing Development during a State visit to Israel by Vice President Biden in Obama’s first term of office that embarrassed Biden and Obama no end. Then he addressed the US Congress over Obama’s head, “running” against him. He publicly humiliated Obama’s administration by belittling Kerry’s herculean efforts at brokering a peace in the recent contretemps in Gaza.  And on and on. Netanyahu needs to keep his eye on the main prize, namely an Israeli - Arab  - American coalition against Iran and show some leadership!  Not to mention that he should aggressively pursue what he maintains is his program - a two State solution to the Palestinian crisis.

Netanyahu needs Obama more than ever politically as Abbas takes his motion to the Security Council to get a Palestinian State approved by November 2016 that encompasses all the land they held prior to 1967. He needs the USA’s unqualified support not only to vote against it but to make it uncomfortable for other members to vote aye. 

 THE  EAST JERUSALEM HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

The discord all started when an Israeli activist movement “Peace Now” broke the news, on September 26, that the plans to build two thousand six hundred and ten homes in East Jerusalem had been finalized. Obama was furious. He had taken great pains, as had Netanyahu, to have a show of normalcy about his meeting with the Israeli Premier. He felt blindsided and in briefings after the mandatory photo ops he let the world know in no uncertain terms. 

The reaction in Israel to Netanyahu’s housing lapse should open the eyes of those in the diaspora that there is an ongoing vigorous debate and criticism of the Israeli administration from the left and right in Israel and no-one is labelled as anti - Israeli for their vituperation.

Netanyahu’s response.

Netanyahu was furious and lashed out against “Peace Now” attacking them for deliberately kyboshing his talks with the USA leader. “Peace Now”, is a left wing organization that was founded in 1982 after the Lebanon invasion. It was then in its heyday and marshaled a demonstration of 400,000 which was ultimately responsible for bringing Sharon down.  Currently they have as their objective a two State solution and have a Settler Watch Committee because unlike Netanyahu they get it - this is the currency of Israel’s good intentions in this arena. So Bibi gave them hell for spilling the beans and one could almost feel for him under the circumstances - fight fair when I am oversea and parleying with Obama don’t embarrass me! Talk about hardball politics - this would be treason around here.

The Israeli PM did his best to explain away the situation - “This was not a settlement but a natural growth of a neighborhood”, “Seventy of the Houses were for Arabs”, “This was not East Jerusalem it was South Jerusalem” and “Israelis and Arabs can buy houses anywhere in Jerusalem”, were examples of his defensive response. The burden of his message was “That it was worth learning the situation before taking a position like that” and “I don’t understand this criticism. I don’t accept this position” he wailed.

All Jay H. Ell can do is just sigh and cry, with so much on a line and the stakes so high, the twenty - six hundred houses built inside of the green line was the height of irresponsibility. What was this guy thinking? One outcome is for certain as “Peace Now” can smugly confirm - Netanyahu will think twice before caving into his mindless right wing to pull another fast one like this. 

Obama’s response.

The USA  President’s comeback did not come in their post meeting platitudinous press conference. It came by the way of WhiteHouse and State Department Spokespersons, Josh Earnest and Jen Psaki. They both had the same direct mantra. They argued that the decision was contrary to Israel’s stated position and sends a troubling message;   “The action called into question Israel’s resolve for a peaceful solution while having the potential to draw condemnation from the international community thereby distancing Israel from the allies”, the “strong” Obama administration statement continued. The spokespersons further contended that Obama had conveyed this message to Netanyahu during their talks. Obama had chastised the Israeli Premier by charging that his peace statements were disingenuous in the light of his actions.

Israeli Press Response.

The Israeli press covered the Washington drama in detail providing a colorful spectrum of the political opinions in Israel. Netanyahu was hammered mercilessly from the left and the right as this sample from the daily newspapers reflect.

The Times of Israel lead with the headline, “US - Israeli Negotiations In Crisis” but the body of the report merely contained the “she said, he said” facts. Haaretz, a left wing daily, also chronicled the drama with its sordid details but the focus was on an op - ed piece by Ari Shavit that likened Obama to Roosevelt and Netanyahu to Churchill, supposedly the role models of each of them, respectively. He maintained that if Obama could exhibit some of the leadership that Kennedy exhibited and Netanyahu some of the wisdom of Levi Eshkol the two would save their legacies. ( Eshkol, an almost a forgotten figure in Israeli history, was a savvy operator who ensured American support, through Lyndon Johnson, in the celebrated Six Day War in 1967).

The Yedioth Ahronoth proclaimed that the whole episode played out like a bad Aaron Sorkin script. Sorkin being the American writer who has penned movies and TV series such as “West Wing”. 

Israel Hayom, which is recognized as Netanyahu’s mouthpiece, did not cover the disaster just the inane post meeting press conference. Giving Netanyahu’s line their commentator, Dan Margalit maintained; “Things are hunky dory between the two leaders. If only the gadfly Ministers on Netanyahu’s right would just shut their big yappers. In these circumstances there was no room for the statements of Uri Ariel and right after  Naftali Bennett. There is no democracy in the world where the leader makes a statement abroad and his ministers attack before he returns home. Even more so now, when Netanyahu reiterated a statement he has been making for five years. What was so urgent that they had to present his words as meaningless. This is a battle over the Jewish Home that is causing unneeded damage to the Jewish State.” 

 IRAN - DOES OBAMA GET IT?

There is a growing perception on the internet and now bursting into the legitimate media that Obama is “selling out” to Iran. Caroline Glick of the internationally recognized Jerusalem Post has very little doubt that he is. The Jerusalem Post also ascribed a statement to the Ayotollah Khomeini, who maintained that Iran was in a better negotiating position with Obama because of ISIS.

Iran has given no assurances on halting their nuclear enrichment program. Notwithstanding that fact the Obama administration has been making conciliatory noises towards the theocracy. Glick points out that Phillip Gordon, the WhiteHouse coordinator for the Middle East announced at the National Iranian American Council that a nuclear agreement would begin a multi-generational process that could lead to a new relationship between the USA and Iran. Gordon added that in order to further the nuclear agreement  the US would ignore Iran’s record on terrorism and other crimes”. This is all in tandem with Obama “in good faith” loosening the economic vice that is crippling Iran.

This is very heavy stuff. Obama would be flying in the teeth of International law as well as American law. It leads credence to Netanyahu’s belief that Obama is compromising on the deal with Iran. Thus Iran would, rather than eliminate their uranium enriching capabilities, just halt them. If this is so then it ignores the UN Resolution that calls for the elimination of the  enrichment process and oversight to effect Iranian compliance. Furthermore, as Glick is quick to point out, Obama initially stated that all that would happen in the event of a nuclear agreement is that the economic sanctions would be dropped and now “normalcy” is being promised. This was not only original Obama’s position it is the law of the land. Normal diplomatic relations can only be afforded with Iran when they drop their support of terrorism.

In addition, in case anyone has forgotten, Iran is a despicable brutal totalitarian theocracy. It is controlled by the Ayatollah not by the current smarmy Prime Minister Rouhani. Rouhani is as much under central control as was Ahmadinejad. It is common cause that Ahmadinejad lost his election and the results were rigged. The resultant “Green Revolution” was brutally put down in a fashion that would have made ISIS proud. Iran is a purveyor of terrorism and evil in the Middle East with its two terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah in tow. Iran supports the medieval  Syrian dictator Assad whose crimes have been on show for all to see these past two years. There is absolutely nothing positive one can say about these mad mullahs other than that they are on their way to their objective to lead the Muslim world.

Eric Edelman, Dennis Ross and Ray Takeyh from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments of the Washington Institute and Council and Foreign Relations concur. They were quoted in the Washington Post warning, “The war on terrorism should not be allowed to conceal the fact that the theocratic Iranian regime and its attempt to upend regional order remains the United States’ most consequential long term challenge in the Middle East.”

If Obama goes ahead with a settlement he could have not foreseen the consequences on the international scene, the Middle East specifically and within the USA - that is he does not get it.

WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN?

• Netanyahu needs to get his act together so that he is not susceptible to the type of denunciation that confronted him in Washington. Even better if Israel could find a new leader that wasn’t so chained to the right wing Israeli crazies.
• A significant minority in Israel see the housing development in the same light as Obama and most of the rest of the world do.
• All this behavior is being accompanied by threats of sanctions to Israel if they do not settle. 
• Netanyahu's frustration is exacerbated by the chutzpah of Hamas who are insiting on a 4 billion aid package to rebuild Gaza that they were responsible for turning into a pile of rubble. As ridiculous as that may seem he has to focus on the fact that while he builds settlements it gives Hamas carte blanche to do what they please.
• Obama, should he go through with this alleged Iran deal, will lose total credibility on the international scene. But ostensibly it can’t really happen without Congress’s permission. Every other day there is talk of Congress impeaching him. The reason for his current predicament is naked prejudice. However this issue is big enough to set it all into motion. He would put the Democrats in a difficult position to try and defend him. As it is they are distancing themselves from him in the midterm elections.
• Obama in the event of a “sell out” would exacerbate the feeling, being openly stated and at present without real foundation, that he is abandoning Israel. Support of Israel is one of the few non partisan issues left in Congress. The “strong” statements following Netanyahu’s snafu will then be seen as an attack on Israel rather than a frustrated rejoinder to someone who has openly thumbed his disdain at him and his administration. Also the State Department’s Psaki’s failure to outright say that the US was opposed to Abbas’s move to gain a Palestine that included all the pre 1967 borders will be seen in a much more sinister light.
• The sentiment in Congress is so strongly in favor of Israel that even Rand Paul, the libertarian who is totally against foreign aid and adventures to the extent that he even opposed Obama’s ISIS policy, has stated that the exception to his philosophy is Israel who should continue to receive a billion a year in foreign aid. 
• Obama’s  strategy is clearly not to link Iranian and Israel policies. In fact Obama announced that the Palestinian crisis is not the cause for the Middle East problems leaving Israel more maneuver room.
• Obama if he strengthens Iran’s position would have crossed his Sunni Gulf State allies and secular allies Jordan and Egypt. He will have sided with the Shia against the Sunnis and destabilized the Middle East even further.
• Iran has a wobbly economically and an unpopular dictatorship and an overthrow is always possible. That could result in a nuclear arsenal being in control of even more radical Islamists.
• Also how could Obama, in the event of letting Iran of the hook, then deny the Saudis the right to build a nuclear reactor and thereby further destabilize the Middle East and the world.
• At the end of the day an Obama sell out is hard to imagine as it would be a disconnect between Obama’s stated policy and his cautious behavior to date. The US nuclear chief negotiator, Wendy Sherman, flatly denies the possibility.
• On November 24 the truth will out as that is the final date for a settlement of the Iranian issue or will it be postponed ad infinitum as Iran hopes.
• Jay H. Ell believes that should Iran not deliver on the nuclear negotiations Congress will step in and stiffen the sanctions against Iran.

So the Israeli and Iranian issues are inextricably bound, much to Obama’s irritation and the Israel’s Settlement policy is an embodiment of Israel’s bona fides to a two state solution much to Netanyahu’s anger and bewilderment.