Opinion - News Analysis   

U.S.-Israel partnership: fraying at the edges?

— Photo: AFP

President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will meet for the first time today.

While we in India have been preoccupied with our shifting political balance of power, all eyes abroad are on Washington where a notable change is taking place in what has previously been regarded as America’s strongest foreign policy relationship, with Israel. As President Barack Obama prepares to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the first time today, many will be watching for signs of how the Obama administration’s Middle East policy will dev elop.

Mr. Netanyahu, whose right-wing coalition came to power on March 31, represents many of the policies that have left many Americans questioning their relationship with Israel. After securing enough support to beat the relatively liberal Kadima party, Mr. Netanyahu pulled together a coalition of staunchly conservative hawks including Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who stated last month that those who “want peace should prepare for war” and rejected the previous Annapolis framework of talks with the Palestinians. Mr. Netanyahu has refused to endorse the concept of a two-state solution to the over 60-year conflict.

President Obama has, on the other hand, expressly called for such a settlement and sees it as the beginning of solving wider problems in the region and the West’s perceived conflict with Islam. The Israeli leader though sees Iran as the greatest immediate threat and feels that Palestinian-Israeli dialogue is a distraction that should take a back seat on America’s agenda until Iran is brought into line on nuclear enrichment.

Israel’s position, however, is much weakened compared to what it was under past U.S. administrations. Mr. Obama came to power on a “talking to Tehran” platform and is seen to be making slow but steady progress down that route. In addition, Israel’s “Operation Cast Lead” which over the Christmas period devastated the Palestinian Gaza Strip, is only the most recent in a long line of events which has done great damage to Israel’s position internationally and America’s willingness to support its old ally.

Israel is not and has never been an effective partner for American foreign policy in the region. From a purely realist perspective, its position as a U.S. ally is incredibly weak. Troublesome in the extreme and unable to provide military support to any U.S. mission in the region (for fear of its being seen as a combined Jews and Crusaders campaign), Israel is already the largest beneficiary of U.S. military and non-military aid. But the country has done very little to ingratiate itself with the U.S. recently and has undoubtedly been a crucial factor in undermining America’s moral credibility and relations with the Islamic world over the years. The two planks of foreign policy this administration seems most focussed on repairing. Americans want to support Israel and President Obama is no exception. His strident address to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) last year showed as much. But at a time when Israel’s actions have seen it time and again accused of war crimes in recent years and when Washington is so nervous of an unannounced Israeli attack on Iran that CIA chief Leon Panetta was sent to Tel Aviv unannounced this month to deliver warnings against such action, it is clear that an old partnership is beginning to fray at the edges.

Beyond the dynamics of Israeli action and inaction towards the Palestinians and Iran, what will colour this first meeting is the fact that Israel is no longer the most important ally of America in the region. There are other problems that concern America now. From possible Iranian rapprochement to newly discovered Hizbullah activity in Egypt to a potential thaw with Syria or the divided state of Palestine’s political establishment and upcoming Lebanese and Iranian elections in early June, there are a number of other things at the top of the schedule for President Obama. That is, of course, when he takes time off from economic issues to consider America’s Middle East plan. The one thing Israel could do now, which would reinstate it in American favour and secure it a better bargaining position in the longer run, is to heed Vice-President Joeseph Biden’s advice at this year’s AIPAC conference. “Israel has to work for a two-state solution. You’re not going to like my saying this, but not build more settlements, dismantle existing outposts and allow Palestinians freedom of movement ... and access to economic opportunity.”

Logic would dictate this course. All previous attempts to subjugate Palestinian national identity have backfired and given hardline Islamist groups such as the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad the ability to attach themselves to an effective liberation ideology. Israel’s brutal efforts to quell successive insurrections have alienated many of those in the international community who formerly backed the Jewish homeland to the hilt. The deal which President Obama is supposedly pushing offers Israel peace and recognition by all Arab and Islamic states in return for its stopping and dismantling illegal Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories and endorsing a two-state solution. Both these issues are going to be forced on Israel sooner or later and the fact that such an offer is on the table whilst negotiations on the right of return for refugees and the status of Jerusalem will be left for later discussions is remarkable. At a time when both King Abdullah of Jordan and Saudi’s Prince Turki are warning of a serious conflagration should no progress be made, it is clear that Israel is in no position to procrastinate.

Mr. Netanyahu, however, is not coming to Washington for a telling-off. His own agenda is the torpedoing of any perceived “appeasement” of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. His right-wing coalition was elected on its strong security credentials and his hope is to persuade the President that softening America’s stance on Iran will only embolden and strengthen hardliners like Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It is unlikely that President Obama will give up on his ambitious plan to engage Iran in a dialogue though. Especially if he sees the discussion as aimed at stalling progress towards any possible peace deal.

The writing is on the wall. The question is: can the Israelis read it?

The last sentence in an article "U.S.-Israel partnership: fraying at the edges?" (Op-Ed, May 18, 2009) was "The writing is on the wall. The question is: can the Israelis read it?" It should have been "The writing is on the wall. The question is: can the Israelis bear to read it?"

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Hard work and good fortune
Controlling hypertension
Obligations of the new mandate
Making sense of the verdict
U.S.-Israel partnership: fraying at the edges?
Guatemala: bank warning lands Tweeter in jail
Politicians of all hues are demoralised
Mature verdict
Manmohan as PM
‘No’ to communalism

Copyright © 2009, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu