POST ELECTION OBAMA PRESSURE ON ISRAEL TO BE “SWIFT AND BRUTAL”
http://www.geostrategy-direct.com/geostrategy-direct/
URL BY SUBSCRIPTION ONLY
Israelis see Obama tightening the screws after November election
 |
|
“Obama sees Israel as a greater threat to his foreign policy than Iran. He believes you can negotiate with Iran, but Israel must be pressured.”
|
JERUSALEM — Israel has assessed the likelihood of a major crisis with the United States in late 2010.
Government sources said Israel’s intelligence community has warned of a clash between Israel and the White House after congressional elections in November 2010. The assessment envisioned that President Barack Obama would intensify pressure on Israel to withdraw from the West Bank and allow for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
“Obama is playing nice because of the elections,” a government source said. “Once the elections are over — win or lose — he will concentrate on his real agenda and that’s forcing a settlement on Israel.”
On Sept. 2, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu participated in a Middle East summit arranged by Obama. On the eve of the summit, Netanyahu and Obama discussed the parameters of a plan for a Palestinian state in the West Bank.
“We want the skyline of the West Bank to be dominated by apartment towers, not missiles,” Netanyahu said after his meeting with Obama on Sept. 1. “We want the roads of the West Bank to flow with commerce, not terrorists.”
The sources said the intelligence assessment expected Obama to make the establishment of a Palestinian state the priority of U.S. foreign policy. They said the president would vigorously, albeit quietly, press for an Israeli commitment for a full withdrawal from the West Bank by 2012 and then demand implementation after the November elections regardless of other regional considerations, including the Iranian nuclear threat.
“Obama sees Israel as a greater threat to his foreign policy than Iran,” the source said. “He believes you can negotiate with Iran, but Israel must be pressured.”
Obama, born and raised a Muslim, was believed to be driven mostly by ideology. They said Obama, a former organizer in the Nation of Islam, wants to go down in history as the U.S. president who pressured Israel into withdrawing from the West Bank.
“Obama either no longer cares about being a one-term president, or believes that he can turn things around much later in his term,” another source said. “So, he is prepared to do anything after the elections to achieve his agenda.”
 |
| President Barack Obama holds a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel on Sept. 1 at the White House. AFP/Tim Sloan |
Max Singer, a leading Israeli strategist close to the prime minister, said Obama was personally formulating the decisions regarding U.S. policy toward Israel. Singer cited a report by Israeli ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren, that Obama represented a “tectonic shift” between the United States and Israel.
“There is every reason to believe that Oren is correctly reporting President Obama’s radically different understanding of world affairs, and that Obama is personally making a large share of the decisions, including all key decisions about the administration’s policy concerning Israel,” Singer said. “Thus, as long as he is president, Obama’s new view will determine much of American policy toward Israel.”
The sources said the intelligence community has determined that Obama was employing outside advisers on how to deal with Israel. They said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not wield any influence on policy.
“Hillary is used by Obama to transmit the tough messages sent by the White House,” the second source said. “For electoral reasons, Obama would prefer that others do the dirty work.”
The scenario raised by the Israeli intelligence community was that Obama would quietly pressure Netanyahu over the next few weeks while expressing his strong support for Israel. The assessment, however, warned that after congressional elections the president would blame Israel, particularly Netanyahu, for any failure in talks with the PA as well as increased regional tension should the prime minister fail to meet Obama’s demands for a rapid withdrawal from the West Bank.
“There are many tools that Obama has, including a military embargo, sanctions, voting for anti-Israeli resolutions in the Security Council,” the second source said. “The pressure would be swift and brutal.”
The assessment dismissed the prospect that Congress would shield Israel from a U.S. crisis. The intelligence community was said to have concluded that Obama would seek to intimidate the pro-Israel lobby in Washington.
Former Israeli ambassador to the United States Zalman Shoval said Obama has changed tactics from those used earlier this year. Shoval said the White House has softened its tone because of political pressure ahead of congressional elections in November, but remains far apart from Israel’s positions.
“This approach by the administration is not a question of tactics, but rather a matter of world view,” Shoval said. “And it is likely to accompany the U.S.-Israel relationship in the months and perhaps years ahead.”
Comments are closed.
