The score: Bibi 3, Bar ack 0.
In a demonstration of political and policy haplessness almost without precedent, the president of the United States decided last week for the third time in three years to go after a beloved ally of the United States with no practical goal and for no practical purpose.
And for the third time, he has had his hat handed to him.
President Obama put conflict with Israel front and center last week by including a new description of the borders of a future Palestinian state in his remarks on Thursday — an endorsement of boundaries for Israel based on the lines that preceded the Six Day War in 1967.
The president did this with deliberate aforethought, we are told by the reporting of New York Times White House correspondent Helene Cooper — precisely because he wanted to upstage and overshadow Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington.
Instead, he was upstaged and overshadowed.
It was Netanyahu, not Obama, who electrified Washington.
On Friday, Netanyahu delivered a joltingly nervy and direct statement of disagreement with Obama’s remarks — which he spoke off the cuff as Obama sat, discomfited, tight beside him at a joint photo op. And then, yesterday, came the real coup — Netanyahu’s speech before a joint session of Congress.
Obama’s policy move ensured the whole world would be watching Bibi as he spoke, and Netanyahu responded with what can only be called the speech of his life.
He was interrupted 29 times — 29 times! — for standing ovations, and 55 times overall for applause.
The shrewdness of his approach was evident from the speech’s outset, when he gracefully knit together Obama, Israel, the United States, the search for democracy in the Middle East and Israel’s needs:
“My friends, you don’t need to do nation-building in Israel. We’re already built. You don’t need to export democracy to Israel. We’ve already got it. You don’t need to send American troops to defend Israel. We defend ourselves. You’ve been very generous in giving us tools to do the job of defending Israel on our own. Thank you all, and thank you President Obama, for your steadfast commitment to Israel’s security. I know economic times are tough. I deeply appreciate this.”
Of course, Republicans in Congress were happy to use Netanyahu as a wedge against Obama. But Netanyahu also found himself the recipient of passionate support on Monday night when two of the three most senior Democrats on Capitol Hill — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer — explicitly and passionately took issue with Obama’s line.
The prime minister now goes home with an unambiguous bipartisan commitment to Israel’s security needs. And he returns with the knowledge that he has survived a third bout of Obamaite hostility toward him and Israel and has again come out the stronger for it.
First, there was the explosion of pique in 2009 over a supposed slight to Vice President Joe Biden that turned into a major diplomatic confrontation, including a deliberate snubbing at the White House. In the end, Obama and his people had to mend fences.
Later, Netanyahu chose to comply in part with an Obama demand for a settlement freeze by imposing a moratorium on building in disputed areas that happened to come to an end in September 2010 — just at a moment when, with elections coming in a matter of weeks, Obama could not afford a direct confrontation with the popular Jewish state.
And now there’s been this foolishness.
Perhaps Obama will get the message that fighting with Israel is a losing proposition and stop. Or perhaps his thirst for payback will express itself yet again in another set-to with Netanyahu.
But given Obama’s electoral needs, that payback is likely to be tabled until after November 2012. And it’s not at all certain he’ll still be there to deliver it.
johnpodhoretz@gmail.com