More on Obama’s Demands on Israel

Some items that I came across since writing my article, now posted on Alternet, about the chances of Israel giving in to U.S. pressure:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu picked up the phone Thursday night and called Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “to propose what he called a package of ‘mutual confidence building’ steps to be taken by Israelis and Palestinians to help restart peace negotiations.” A statement issued by the Israeli government said that the proposal “had won the unanimous support of the seven members of Mr. Netanyahu’s inner cabinet, which includes representatives of right-wing parties in his coalition.”

There’s no indication that Netanyahu accepted the list of demands given him by Clinton. But the very fact that he offered anything at all could easily be seen by the Israeli right as a sign of weakness in the showdown.  What moved the right-wingers to accept it?

Here’s one possibility.  Veteran Israeli journalist Anshel Pfeffer writes:  “When senior ministers or generals list Israel’s defense priorities, there is always one point on which there exists total consensus: The alliance with the United States as the nation’s greatest strategic asset, way above anything else.”  Israel’s military leaders, often seen as the strongest political force in the country, may be pushing Netanyahu to make compromises to please the U.S. — as long as the Obama administration keeps insisting on those compromises.

Is Netanyahu politically safe if he makes such compromises?  The latest poll of Israeli public opinion suggests he could be safe: “A sweeping majority of Israelis think Obama’s treatment of this country is friendly and fair. … 48 percent said Israel must keep building in the capital, even at the expense of a rift with the United States, while 41 percent said Israel must accept the American demand to stop building in Jerusalem until the end of negotiations.”  Apparently 11 percent are undecided and could be swayed toward accepting American demands.

Israeli journalist Yossi Verter’s interpretation:  “Netanyahu may conclude that at the moment he may have some room to maneuver, but the balance between supporters and opponents of continued construction could easily shift.”  It’s most likely to shift toward supporting a prime minister who accepts American demands if those demands are pressed firmly and consistently.

Will the Obama administration keep up the pressure?  We’ll get a good first indication on Tuesday, when Netanyahu meets with Obama in Washington.  The fact that Obama rearranged his schedule to offer this meeting might indicate that Obama feels pressure from the right to make nice with the Israeli leader.

But it’s hard to imagine that Obama would make such a gesture unless he’s already got some assurance that he can emerge from the meeting with a promise from Netanyahu of progress. And that promise would have to be some major concessions on the Israeli’s part. Otherwise it’s a total embarrassment for the U.S. president. I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of Obama embarrassing himself, though it seems unlikely.  We’ll have to wait and see.

But to repeat my main point:  Obama’s response depends significantly on the political pressures he feels from the left as well as the right.

Too many progressives seem to think that pressure from the left can’t make any difference on this issue, that the Israeli government and its right-wing supporters will always prevail in Washington. It’s easy to say, “We won’t even show up for the game because we know the other side will win.” That may save you a lot of effort. But it guarantees that the other side will win. I prefer to play the game and pay close attention to all the evidence that suggests I have a good chance of winning.

PS:  One technical note:  In a New York Times op-ed, Israel’s ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, claimed that “consistently, Israel has held that Jerusalem should remain its undivided capital and that both Jews and Arabs have the right to build anywhere in the city.”  Wrong.  Writing in the generally conservative Jerusalem Post, Larry Derfner reminds us that “by Israeli law, Arabs are effectively prohibited not only from building new homes but even from buying old ones in the Jewish parts of the city.  Meanwhile, Jews can buy and build in the capital wherever they want.”