Obama spits Netanyahu in the face - and Netanyahu carries much of the blame

Before leaving office, Obama decided to spit Netanyahu in the face. The recent UN resolution is a harsh blow to Israel. It does not differentiate between all the scattered settler outposts and for instance the Western Wall and the ancient Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem.

However, the ultimate blame lies with Netanyahu. HE does not differentiate, but has cast them all in the same bag. With the policies of his extreme right-wing government, he has turned not only Obama, but the entire world against Israel. By devoting his government resources, time and money, to protect illegal settlements such as Armona, rather than to resolving devastating poverty and disengagement from occupied territory, he and his government has thrown the country into darkness and isolation.

While the US abstained and did not veto the resolution, all other Security Council members voted in favor of it, against the destructive process of Netanyahu and his government (in which he himself holds several additional portfolios).

All this does not amount to seeing Palestinian maneuvering in a positive light. At the beginning of his first term as President, Obama asked Netanyahu to make a gesture to the Palestinians, to encourage them to return to the negotiating table. Netanyahu agreed and froze all building in the settlements for ten months, which sadly did not move the Palestinians. With increasing international support, they are not likely to return to negotiations, but proceed on the international arena, gaining increasing recognition, while Israel becomes increasingly isolated, much due to its current policies.

Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert offered the Palestinians complete return of territory (with exchanges from within Israel proper), but these possibilities for peaceful resolution were rejected by the Palestinian leadership.

At this point, Israel should in my view (and of course Netanyahu is not going in that direction) follow a two-track policy:

1. Be open to both direct and regional negotiations, whether toward a comprehensive solution (less likely) or a step-by-step process, in which small pieces of additional territory is handed over to the Palestinians, each step accompanied by an agreed-upon step by the Palestinians (such as stopping incitement), and

2. Unilateral disengagement from civilian occupation: As a first step, freezing all construction in settlements beyond the security fence, followed by withdrawal from these settlements, which initially should be handed over to the military. Following agreements with the Palestinians, these settlements should eventually be handed over to the Palestinian National Authority. (When Israel withdrew from Gaza, the evacuated settlements were handed over, but sadly destroyed by the Palestinians. In this case, that part of the process should be internationally overseen to prevent a repeat.)

In the hope that in spite of apprehensions, 2017 will turn out to be a constructive year towards peace and reconciliation.

The Deal with Iran is a Bad Deal – Approve it!

Harsh words have been used to criticize the agreement with Iran, according to which inspections are dubious, seemingly much in the hands of the untrustworthy Iranian regime itself. Iran makes it clear that it intends to remain the leading state sponsor of terror in the Middle East (and possibly elsewhere), and has recently increased its advanced military acquisitions from Russia and China.

At a time when sanctions had begun to have a serious impact on the Iranian regime, they were lifted by negotiating this agreement. Whether the United States and the other signatures of the agreement have been naïve, achieving “peace in our time” along the lines of Chamberlain’s agreement with Nazi Germany, or have defused the cloud of nuclear threat, remains to see.

Iranian leader tweets Obama with gun to his head - July 18, 2015 

Those in favor of a liberal and peaceful reaching out toward agreement with a non-liberal, deceitful, cruel and genocidal regime, are naturally in favor of ratifying this severely flawed agreement, and try to convince as that the deal isn't that bad.

And those forces who look at Iran as a severe threat to the world, whether because they are realistic, or because they are inclined to blame the other, want to reject the deal, and to convince us that it is all bad.

While there are both assets and shortcomings to the deal, some of the flaws, such as inspections, seem all too problematic, as does the beyond provocative genocidal intentions that in self-confident arrogance continue to be expressed by Iranian leaders, no less, and perhaps with greater force, after the deal has been agreed upon.

But at this stage to reject the deal is as naïve as its signing. The Iranian regime does not want a deal. They do not want to sign commitments, which, some of them, they will have to break, either deceitfully or, if necessary, openly defy. All they want is the lifting of sanctions, which they have already achieved, with the possibility to continue their nuclear threat, establishing them as the leading force in this area of the world. The United Nations has voted to suspend and lift sanctions, European companies have re-ignited business with Iran, and Russia and China are now openly selling advanced weapons technology and airplanes.

The Iranian parliament has postponed its vote till after the vote in the Congress. An American rejection will put the blame on the US, cause an internal American rift, while simultaneously unite moderates and extremists in the Iranian regime. Nothing will prevent them to increase their significant support of terror and military forces such as Hizballah, and freely develop military nuclear power. No restraints, no limitations, and no sanctions.

This bad deal has trapped the United States, the more moderate Sunni Arab regimes, and Israel. A rejection of the deal will only trap them even further, while Iran is relieved of sanctions, relieved of restrictions, and relieved of blame.

Thus, at this stage, the deal should be approved. However, I suggest the establishment of a Monitoring Committee, headed by the United States, with relatively moderate Sunni States, France and Germany, and Israel. While this committee would not in itself have the means to implement either sanctions or inspections, it can have a strong monitoring capability, a moral impact, and a strong public diplomacy standing. Parallell to the overt monitoring of the implementation (or non-implementation) of details in the agreement, such a monitoring committee would have access to the most advanced intelligence. While a considerably better deal would have been preferable, the deal does provide for a stronger diplomatic stance vis-à-vis Iran. Exposure of non-compliance will therefore have considerably greater impact than without a deal.

To everything there is a season; a time of war, and now a time of peace

Thank you President Obama for your visit in Israel. 

You won the hearts of all. The truth is, the minds of most are already oriented in the same direction as yours: a majority of Israelis, even of those who voted for PM Netanyahu, prefer a viable Palestinian State alongside Israel to stalemate, and would prefer ploughshares to swords.

Impressively, you corrected some mistakes of the past – such as not to make negotiations conditional on a settlement freeze.

President Abbas, now it is your turn not to repeat the mistakes of the past: You keep insisting on a settlement freeze as a pre-condition for entering negotiations. When PM Netanyahu agreed to President Obama’s request and implemented a ten-month settlement freeze, you did not return to the negotiation table, but asked for more.

And if you were truly honest, you would recognize Israel as a (the) Jewish State (with a sizable Arab minority), just like the State of Palestine, doubtlessly, is an Arab State (which you prefer without Jews).

PM Netanyahu – this is your third government. Fortune has brought you yet another opportunity. In spite of your hopes and the expectation that you would win a giant election victory, you barely escaped embarrassing defeat. What seemed like an unalterable long-term trend toward the right, received a surprising blow, and the Israeli people clearly said, “We want change.”

This is the time to seek your place in the annals of the people of Israel. You probably wanted to be recorded in the history book of your father, the right-wing historian. But your father is dead, and now, as we celebrate Passover, in commemoration of liberation from slavery, you are free to abandon the too grand fantasies and enter into the freedom of realistic implementation.

Please do hold on to the sense of historical rights of the Jewish people to the entire Land of Israel, yet do also realize that this earth is shared between two peoples, each with its grandiose fantasies, wanting it all for themselves, but having to compromise in the balance of reality.

If, likewise, the Palestinian leadership, who adheres to the idea of Greater Palestine, abandons their written desire to actually cleanse this land of the Jews, then both sides may approach each other.

This is a golden opportunity. President Obama has expressed and demonstrated his firm commitment, and will provide the help the sons of Isaac and the sons of Ishmael need.

Prime Minister Netanyahu, you will have a strong majority behind you if you:

• declare a stop of building in all settlements beyond the security fence, and a step-by-step process of “evacuation-compensation” of the Jewish settlers there, rather than wasting the country’s finances on settlements that in any case at some point will be evacuated; and
• recognize the State of Palestine, within temporary borders.

You could then suggest the beginning of a process of negotiations of partial agreements, in which every agreed-upon step is implemented, rather than complete agreements, to be implemented only at the end of negotiations (which has not been successful).

It may be more convenient for the Palestinians to negotiate as a Palestine – Jordan confederation, which makes it more sustainable during interim stages, and puts the pressure off the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish State early in the process.

That way, areas of West Bank land not yet under Palestinian control can be handed over, step by step, to the Palestinian State, which together with Jordan can implement the necessary security to prevent rockets and other military equipment from entering, which might threaten for instance Israeli air traffic.

In exchange for the settlement blocs along the former Green Line (a few percent of the West Bank), in which the great majority of Israeli settlers live, Egypt could provide area in Sinai to enable the necessary expansion of Gaza, while Israel turns over part of Western Negev to Egypt.

Map by Shaul Arieli 

Whatever procedures, processes and arrangements, this is the season and the time to be liberated from rigid conceptualizations. President Obama clearly showed the way, including learning from past mistakes. Many claim your government has a too strong right-wing element. That will not be a big problem; just like your mentor Menachem Begin, who signed a peace treaty with Egypt relying on the left, you can safely rely on a parliamentary majority in favor of peace. All it takes is a courage, creativity and leadership.

Happy Passover ! חג שמח 

From the Arthur Szyk Haggadah

Further readings: The Hero & His Shadow: Psychopolitical Aspects of Myth and Reality in Israel; Requiem: A Tale of Exile and Return.