President Obama’s belief that his mere presence could usher in an era of Arab-Israeli peace has finally been mugged by reality.
From the start, the administration tried to shift from America’s natural pro-Israel stance to a more “balanced” position, as favored by Western Europeans and the “international community.” But he apparently has realized that the “change” he has wrought consists of bad policy and even worse politics. A much-needed course correction is under way; let’s hope Washington can stick with it.
As Obama sits down with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington tonight, he has to contend with growing Arab disappointment. Shortly after decreeing a January presidential election, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas protested the new US stance by announcing last week that he wouldn’t participate in it.
But Abbas hadn’t resigned; he’d merely said he wouldn’t run for re-election in January — when no one believes any Palestinian vote will really take place. It’s a stunt, designed to press Obama for fresh appeasement measures.
How did we get here? Much to the surprise and delight of Arabs, the Obama team opted early on to highlight one aspect of the Arab-Israeli dispute above all: Israel’s West Bank settlements. While some Israel critics had always thought settlements were the real stumbling block for peace, Palestinians had never posed a total settlement freeze as a precondition for negotiating with Israeli leaders. Now, with America’s backing, they did exactly that.
Yet this, as Netanyahu soon made clear, was a concession Israel refused to make. Thus, an American demand had in effect stopped any hope that a US-led peace process would be renewed. Worse, while some in Washington had hoped that the pressure would weaken Netanyahu politically, Israeli polls show that he is more popular than ever.
Events continue to expose the Obama shift’s foolishness. Shayetet 13, an Israeli naval commando unit, last week captured the Francop, a ship supposedly carrying civilian goods from Bandar Abbas in Iran to Syria’s naval hub, Latakia. The seized cargo included 500 tons of crates filled with rockets, guns and grenades. Israel estimates that the materiel would’ve allowed Iran’s intended end client, Hezbollah, to exact a full month of destruction on Israeli cities.
Facing such real dangers, Israelis are in no mood for one-sided concessions in the hope of reaching virtual peace with a Palestinian leader who has tenuous control over the West Bank and no access to Gaza, which is run by the Islamist terrorist group Hamas.
And so, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced last week a new position on settlements: Netanyahu has already made “unprecedented” concessions on settlements, showing their “restraint,” she noted in Jerusalem. While she later moderated the statement to appease Arabs, America’s policy readjustment seemed genuine.
There’s a political reason for this, too: While some Obama advisers were heeding international critics who accuse Washington of leaning too far toward Israel, the American people and their elected representatives remain where they always were.
For example, Washington and the United Nations weighed in last week on a report that a South African judge, Richard Goldstone, had produced for the UN Human Rights Council. (Erasing the distinction between war and war crimes, the report accuses Israelis who fought against Gaza terrorists last winter of possibly committing crimes against humanity.)
In the UN General Assembly, 114 nations voted last Thursday to endorse Goldstone’s findings, with most Western Europeans showing a lack of backbone by abstaining; only 18 countries opposed the resolution. Yet, one day earlier, the House of Representatives had passed a bipartisan resolution rejecting Goldstone’s report by the overwhelming margin of 344 to 36.
The automatic anti-Israel majority in the “international community” is matched only by the automatic pro-Israel sentiment in Congress — and, as a recent Anti-Defamation League poll shows, among American voters.
Obama can’t stray too far from such sentiments. He has raised Arab expectations too high and has finally made a first step toward correcting that error. Now he must find his way out of the trap he set for himself, without abandoning Israel in the process.beavni@gmail.com