 | Middle East Forum | |
| MEF Home Research & Writings Middle East Quarterly | ||
A Rapid and Harsh Turn against | ||
Send
Comment
RSS
 Yasir Arafat smiles as |
An article by Jackson
Diehl of the Washington Post captures this shift most vividly.
Diehl notes, based on an interview with Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian
Authority, that by publicly and repeatedly stressing the need for a
without-exception freeze of Israeli building on the West Bank, Obama
has revived a long-dormant Palestinian fantasy: that the
United States will simply force Israel to make critical concessions,
whether or not its democratic government agrees, while Arabs passively
watch and applaud. "The Americans are the leaders of the world. … They
can use their weight with anyone around the world. Two years ago they
used their weight on us. Now they should tell the Israelis, 'You have to
comply with the conditions'."
Of course, telling the Israelis is one thing and getting
their compliance quite another. To this, Abbas also has an answer.
Expecting that Netanyahu's agreeing to a complete freeze on building would
bring down his coalition, Diehl explains that Abbas plans "to sit back and
watch while U.S. pressure slowly squeezes the Israeli prime minister from
office." One Palestinian Authority official predicted this would happen
within "a couple of years" – exactly when Obama is said to expect a Palestinian
state in place.
Meanwhile, Abbas plans to sit tight. Diehl explains his
thinking:
Abbas rejects the notion that he should make any
comparable concession—such as recognizing Israel as a Jewish state,
which would imply renunciation of any large-scale resettlement of
refugees. Instead, he says, he will remain passive. … "I will wait for
Israel to freeze settlements," he said. "Until then, in the West Bank we
have a good reality . . . the people are living a normal
life."
Abbas's idea of "normal life," one should add, is also
largely provided by Washington and its allies; West Bank Palestinians
enjoy by far the highest per-capita foreign
aid of any group in the world; at just one "donors' conference" in
December 2007, for example, Abbas won pledges for over US$1,800 per West
Banker per year.
As Diehl tersely concludes, "In the Obama administration, so
far, it's easy being Palestinian."
Even if one ignores the folly of focusing on Jerusalemites
adding recreation rooms to their houses rather than Iranians adding
centrifuges to their nuclear infrastructure and even if one overlooks the
obvious counter productivity of letting Abbas off the hook – the new U.S.
approach is doomed.
First, Netanyahu's governing
coalition should prove impervious to U.S. pressure. When he formed the
government in March 2009, it included 69 parliamentarians out of the
Knesset's 120 members, well over the 61 minimum. Even if the U.S.
government succeeded in splitting off the two parties least committed to
Netanyahu's goals, Labor and Shas, he could replace them with right-wing
and religious parties to retain a solid majority.
Second, the record shows that Jerusalem takes "risks for
peace" only when trusting its American ally. An administration that
undermines this fragile trust will likely confront a wary and reluctant
Israeli leadership.
If Washington continues on its present course, the result
may well be spectacular policy failure that manages both to weaken
America's only strategic ally in the Middle East even as it worsens
Arab-Israeli tensions.
diplomacy, US policy
Daniel
Pipes
To subscribe to the MEF mailing lists, go to http://www.meforum.org/list_subscribe.php
You may post or forward this text, but on condition that you send it as an
integral whole, along with complete information about its author, date,
publication, and original URL.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment