The first was his open disdain for President Barack Obama, which graduated into a not-too-subtle endorsement of Governor Mitt Romney. This led Aaron Miller, a veteran Middle East negotiator, to describe the Netanyahu-Obama relationship as “the most dysfunctional I have ever seen”. Nor did it endear Netanyahu to his admirers in the US or his supporters back home, for as pointed out by Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, “Bibi backed the wrong horse” and after his latest adventure, “there has been a reversal of balance between Bibi and Obama”.
Given his commando instincts, Netanyahu’s second error was to opt immediately after Obama’s victory for a pre-emptive strike, ostensibly to refurbish his hawkish credentials, to silence critics at home and ensure victory in the January elections and, thereafter, stymie any White House peace initiative. This could also put to test President Mohamed Morsi’s credentials as a “reliable” peace partner. Why else kill Al Jabari, the Hamas military leader, who was instrumental in agreeing to a truce, if not but as a move to serve Netanyahu’s domestic and foreign policy goals?
The past weeks have, however, proven the truth of the ancient adage that the best laid plans are subject to uncertainties. For one, Morsi demonstrated unexpected skill and resolve, defying popular sentiments to engage in forceful negotiations with Israel, becoming the main interlocutor between Hamas and Israel, while establishing himself as a credible partner with the US, thereby trashing reservations about him in US Congress and the media. In the process, Morsi earned the Obama Administration’s public appreciation, prompting Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to observe that Egypt was “assuming responsibility and leadership that has long made this country a cornerstone of regional stability and peace”. Netanyahu, too, expressed his “appreciation for the efforts of Egypt”. After all, Egypt’s enhanced role would serve to reduce Iran’s influence in the region. And while doing all this, the Egyptian president reinforced his ties with the Hamas, proving to be an effective friend, which led Khaled Meshaal, the Hamas leader, to declare: “May God keep him in the presidency”. (It is, however, another matter that soon thereafter, Morsi went for a power grab that has engulfed him in a serious domestic crisis).
Secretary Clinton is savouring what may well be the last round of applause she is likely to receive for her diplomatic skills. President Obama would also be enjoying the sight of his detractor shooting himself in the foot. He has, however, continued to strike the traditionally pro-Israel stance, steadfast in support for Israel’s right to “defend” itself, while not urging “restrain” in its bombing campaign against civilian targets. Incidentally, it was Obama who had approved funds for the Iron Dome missile defence system, which reportedly intercepted 90 per cent of the Hamas-launched missiles.
Does this mean that President Obama has buttressed his credentials with Israel and its supporters in the US to a degree that would enable him to think of the larger agenda for the region? Surely, he is wise enough to recognise that the region has gone through a historic transformation and Israel’s ephemeral victories will not bring peace to this long-tormented land, unless the issue of Palestinian independence is resolved. The fragile ceasefire is only a brief pause that needs to be seized to revive the dormant peace process. Admittedly, the Arab-Israeli dispute is not amenable to easy or pain-free resolution, but if history is any guide, if anyone can venture into these choppy waters, it is only an American president, in his second term.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 28th, 2012.
COMMENTS (9)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
-(1)1714378140-0/AliAminMaryam-(4)-(1)1714378140-0-270x192.webp)
1714370039-0/ojwilson-(1)1714370039-0-270x192.webp)
Palestine? I try very hard to look at the facts as these really are and try not to talk the language of those who are well known to be economical with truth.Those who are economical with truth will try and do try very hard to make us believe that Jesus was a wicked man. The very same people will try to make us believe that their 500 year old "Campaign of terror" in many parts of the world starting from Central America is a "War on terror". I alongwith the many who look at facts as these are, am not going to accept those "Lies" coming from well known habitual liars. My information, it may not be well updated, is that the Arabs live in Arabia. Nowhere else. Looking at the history of this Asian land belonging to no one, other than the local Asian people i.e. the Palestinians, is that these people have been living on this land since thousands of years and certainly, absolutely certainly, are the descendents of the children of Israhyeel. Who are the Israelis then? Was Pontius Pilate an Israeli? Those Romans were at least honest about their religion. They did not hide the facts that they practised the Roman religion i.e. stealing lands, stealing peoples' hard earned wealth, taking non Romans slaves. They were, eventually, thrown out of this land by the local Asian people after enduring their torturous Roman rule for nearly 200 years. Then came to this Asian peoples' land, once again, the children of the Romans about 1000 years ago. Their deeds were exactly as that of their Godless Roman forefathers. Yet they called themselves Christians. Since they were found to be in practise of crucifying the holy Commandments Lord Creator handed down to Moses, could they be in the following of Jesus? Same goes for the present day European invaders and colonisers of this land. They are, as their forefathers were, thieves and murderers. They came to steal Palestinian peoples' lands as did their forefathers twice before. So could thieves and murderers who are seen to be crucifying the holy Commandments Lord Creator handed down to Moses, be Jews? Their every day deeds show that they do not abide by the holy Commandments Moses received. Their deeds show that they do not uphold the sanctity of the holy Torah. True? Do we not hear about it all happening almost every day? So how could these people practising the Roman religion be Jews? The true Jews, as far I know, indeed, are those who uphld the sanctity of the holy Torah. They are the Torah Jews. They do not believe in or practise the Roman religion of stealing other peoples' lands or belongings and committing murders. Their religion does not sanction such criminal, inhuman and brutal acts. Every time the Iranian President,Ahmednejaad visits New York these Jews, true Jews hold a very cordial reception in his honour and get along very well. So would every true Jew, true Christian and true Muslim. Now let me ask our learned author as to what credentials those European thieves and murderers have to justify them being called Jews and Israeli? The true children of Israhyeel are indeed the Palestinians. Should one not expect Truth being always be told by those who recite the Kalimah of allegience to Lord Creator night and noon? Should the believers also talk the language of the habitual liars?
Only One country makes all these Arabians to act as servants!!Here analysis and hatred speeches are going on though they have no firepower , only smoke.
Cautious makes his prejudice apparent in his comments. To him the Palestinians are terrorists while those who have come from all over the world but mostly from Russia and Eastern Europe. are the real "owners" of Palestine.. There is no such thing as honesty and fairnesss in his views, which are always couched in harsh and abusive language. He is either ill-informed or full of animosity towards people other than his own.
Israel's preemptive strike killed the man who armed Hamas with Iranian long-range rockets, 90% of which have now been destroyed. It also tested its Iron Dome anti-missile system, thereby sending a message to Iran. Morsi has been brought into the picture and will now be responsible for any Hamas misadventures (remember Egypt needs soft loans from the IMF and the west pretty soon). With the Israeli lobby in the United States being what it is, I don't think Netanyahu didn't know who would win the elections; he simply wanted to restate that the US had a symbiotic relationship with Israel in the Middle East and should not take any action unilaterally, no matter who became President.
The fascination with the strongman continues. Now it is Morsi who is going to deliver the "goods" , of course,after he has appropriated all powers to himself. The worst is yet to come with strongmen like Meshaal and Morsi. They neither have the temperament nor the desire to negotiate a stable future for their own. Vey much like the past. Despite all the bombast of culture, religion, population and oil dollars, you continue to blame the "Jews" and wait for the second term of an American president to initiate a long lasting peace. Why can't you do that?
Like any other nation Palestinians have a birth right of self rule and end of occupation. The rightwing Israeli govt would be hesitating to attack Gaza or West Bank, once the kill ratio becomes 10:1 not 100:1 with Israel having all the air, naval and land power. As long as Israel has this huge advantage there would be no independence or end of occupation. BBN in his rightwing zeal went out of the way to interfere in the US elections and chose the more rightwing Romney. However, the US should not allow the tail wag the dog, even if the tail is a friendly country. How could a tiny country dictate its policies to the richest and strongest country in the word? BBN has bitten more than he could chew!
Nothing new in Netanyahu not getting along with US Presidents - he wasn't even on speaking terms with Clinton. As far as "backing the wrong horse" every Israeli PM would prefer a Republican President - its a fact of life - but they know that American Jewish voters tends to consistently vote the Democrat ticket. . Bibi scored a major coup by taking out the head of Hamas military wing - author may believe he was a "peacemaker" but that's naive at best and probably disingenuous. The Israeli public is glad he was taken out and it's likely that the Saudi's and many other Arab countries won't miss him either. . Obama didn't need to bolster his credentials with Israel to focus on regional issues - the author has always been fond of pointing out that the USA always protects Israel and this latest conflict demonstrated that policy hasn't changed. Bill Clinton wasted his last term in office trying to resolve the Arab/Palestinian issue and it's unlikely that Obama will fall into the same trap - he will, however, spend time focusing on Egypt.