by Isi Leibler
Should Obama revert to his earlier approach of continuously, and publicly reprimanding Israel whilst treating the duplicitous Palestinian leaders with kid gloves, he could bring about a confrontation with Congress.
| 
Bedfellows. Prime Minister  Benjamin Netanyahu will be obliged to endeavor to overcome the personal  animosity which bedeviled his relationship with Obama.                                                                                                   
|Photo credit: AP                                          | 
Being in the U.S. this week during the  elections has truly been a remarkable experience and a roller coaster.  The outcome is that, for better or for worse, the American people have  determined that President Barack Obama will serve a second four-year  term as leader of the Western world.
Aside from Americans, this will probably  impact more on us in Israel than any other nation because of our heavy  reliance on U.S. political and military support. But the die has been  cast and everyone, including those of us who were deeply apprehensive  about how a second term Obama would relate to us, must accept the  verdict of the American people. 
Our government should now concentrate on  devising a strategy to maximize a meaningful relationship with the  second Obama administration without compromising our security or  independence. This will not be easy but it is achievable so long as we  behave rationally. American grass-roots support for Israel remains  strong and Congress does not abandon us.
Despite that most politicians routinely  abrogate pre-electoral promises, we should act on the initial assumption  that Obama will behave honorably and broadly adhere to the positive  undertakings relating to Israel that he constantly reiterated over the  past six months. He should be reminded that in the course of the last  debate with Romney, he went so far as to say “Israel is a true friend. …  It is our greatest ally in the region. And if Israel is attacked,  America will stand with Israel.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be  obliged to endeavor to overcome the personal animosity that bedeviled  his relationship with Obama and contributed to the troublesome tensions  that exacerbated differences between both countries over the past four  years.
We should be heartened by the fact that  Obama’s “charm campaign” and pragmatic pro-Israeli policies designed to  obtain support from American Jews during the pre-election period,  suggest that he is not necessarily committed to an ideological  anti-Israeli agenda. 
Hopefully, from Obama’s vantage, he may have  appreciated that bullying or demeaning Netanyahu was counterproductive  and in fact strengthened rather than undermined his popular support In  Israel.
He must also be aware that over the past few  years, despite some erosion within the Democratic party, Congress  remains overwhelmingly supportive of Israel, reflecting the record  levels of support that Israel enjoys overall with the American people.  Should Obama revert to his earlier approach of continuously and publicly  reprimanding Israel while treating the duplicitous Palestinian leaders  with kid gloves, he could bring about a confrontation with Congress.
By now, Obama may also have independently  reached the conclusion that by distancing the U.S. and exerting harsh  pressure on Israel, all he achieved was to embolden radical Islamists  and encourage the Palestinians to become more intransigent in their  demands.
Moreover, after burning itself on so many  occasions in its former failed Middle East policies, the new  administration may well decide to distance itself from seeking to  resolve the intractable Arab-Israeli conflict.
We should therefore, at least at the outset,  adopt a positive approach to the new administration and assume that  Obama will adhere to his commitments and that the improvement in  relations with Israel created over the past six months will be  sustained. 
However it is important for pro-Israel  activists to be prepared immediately to raise their voices should Obama  renege on his electoral undertakings.
This applies particularly in relation to  Obama’s passionate pledge that Iran would never be permitted to obtain a  nuclear bomb under his watch. He stated repeatedly “As long as I am  president of the United States, Iran will not get a nuclear weapon.”
Israel must also, if necessary, be prepared to  initiate a public campaign to explain our position should Obama revert  to insisting that the indefensible 1949 armistice lines serve as the  opening benchmark for negotiations with the Palestinians.
In addition, American Jewish leaders —  presumably led by AIPAC — must as a priority, launch a major campaign to  reinforce the traditional pro-Israeli attitude relationship of the  Democratic party. Such a course of action would have been equally  imperative had Romney been elected.
At a grass roots level there is now  unquestionably a growing far-left minority emerging within the  Democratic party that is indifferent and, in many cases, outright  hostile to Israel. It received a boost from the Obama Administration  when it sought to distance itself from Israel to appease the Arabs. 
These trends were accelerated by agitation  from Jews bitterly opposed to the Israeli government, as exemplified by  Jeremy Ben-Ami, head of J Street, who claims to have a better  understanding of what is good for Israel than Israelis, themselves, and  journalist Peter Beinart, who is adored by the liberal media and calls  for a global boycott of Israeli settlements. Ignoring the fact that  today, subject to the Palestinians recognizing Israel’s security needs, a  consensus prevails in Israel favoring a two-state policy — these Jews  have been continuously trying to persuade elements within the Democratic  party that Israel was the intransigent party and the obstacle to  achieving a peace settlement in the Arab-Israeli conflict. 
The growing influence of anti-Israeli factions  within the Democratic party was evident in the course of the party’s  recent National Convention with the deletion of positive references to  Israel which had traditionally been incorporated in the conference  declaration. It was also highlighted dramatically by the chilling and  unprecedented booing that greeted the reinsertion of a section  recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. 
The reinforcement of bipartisanship towards  Israel is crucial, because if elements hostile to Israel become dominant  or even influential among either of the two mainstream parties, it  would undermine one of the strongest foundations sustaining the U.S.-  Israel alliance. That the majority of Jews continued to support Obama in  the elections should strengthen the ability of Democrats seeking to  marginalize the anti-Israeli elements and restore the standing of Israel  in the Democratic party.
Isi Leibler
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=6342
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
 
No comments:
Post a Comment