Netanyahu is piloting the ship of state, carefully

By Ted Belman

Yamit and others have called for Netanyahu’s scalp on these pages, but they do not represent the broad right of center public.

Jonathan Spyer of MERIA has a major article on THE NETANYAHU GOVERMENT AT ITS HALFWAY POINT. He starts by setting out Netanyahu’s professed priorities as being to stop Iran, build a better economy in the Judea and Samaria and fight deligitimation. He also demands recognition of Israel as a Jewish state as an indication of a PA change of goals.

    Of course, this strategy has been made problematic by the emergence in Washington–almost simultaneously to the election of the Netanyahu government–of a U.S. administration that sees the region in a very different way.

    The administration of President Barack Obama has made the repairing and enhancement of U.S. relations with the Muslim world a priority, and the president places the solving of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict high on the list of priorities in achieving this.[12] The core difference in outlook on the region between Washington and Jerusalem has been the most salient dynamic during the period of Netanyahu’s second prime ministership, and has informed every element of its attempt to implement its strategy.


Nothing has been acheived with respect to Iran and Netanyahu is keeping all options on the table while educating the US government.

    This hope, of course, has not been realized. Rather, the U.S. administration chose to make progress on the Israeli-Palestinian front a central part of its regional strategy. Netanyahu was forced to adjust accordingly. The crucial importance of maintaining the strategic relationship with the United States necessitated efforts to stay on the “same page” with the administration on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, in spite of the view among those close to the Israeli prime minister that the U.S. view of what was achievable in this regard was and remains deluded.

    Achieving this, however, requires something of a diplomatic and political tight rope walk for the prime minister. He has needed to convince the U.S. administration that he is not the factor obstructing its efforts to make progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track (and hopefully demonstrate to their satisfaction that Palestinian positions made a permanent status agreement unachievable), while at the same time avoiding the departure of right-wing coalition partners. At the beginning of his premiership, in a significant speech at Bar-Ilan University in June 2009, the prime minister expressed in clear terms his support in principle for the creation of a Palestinian state.[27] The government subsequently accepted a ten-month moratorium on settlement building at the end of 2009.

    Over time and with a number of stumbles along the way, Netanyahu appears to have managed to position Israel in such a way as to avoid the impression that it was acting as a deliberate obstruction to Obama’s Israeli-Palestinian policy. This did not, however, prevent tensions from resurfacing–most famously in March 2010 during a visit to Israel of Vice President Joe Biden, when the administration objected to the announcement of an Israeli construction plan in a Jerusalem neighborhood across the Green Line.

Spyer gives him an “A”.

    For Netanyahu, who in any case has few expectations of the talks, the prospect of the Palestinians beginning to overplay their hand as U.S.-Israeli relations are patched up is a promising one. The agreement by the Palestinian Authority to the commencement of direct talks in late August 2010 does not substantially alter the picture. There is little reason to assume that Netanyau expects the talks to yield substantial results. Yet his demonstrated willingness to participate in them serves his broader strategy.

Long range

    It is also worth bearing in mind that according to informed sources, Netanyahu intends to stand again for the leadership of the Likud and for the prime ministership.[25] As such, the time frame in which he is thinking is not one in which he has only a year or two remaining. It is also generally considered that Netanyahu would be almost certain to win any contest for the Likud leadership at the present time. Thus, his plan may well be to hold elections again next year or the following year, on the basis of a sound economy, an ongoing negotiating process with the Palestinians, and above all a continued determination to neutralize the Iranian threat.[26]
October 3, 2010 | 8 Comments »

Leave a Reply

8 Comments / 8 Comments

  1. Email from Mattot Arim:

    Crisis: call please.
    Netanyahu is about to extend the building freeze indefinitely. That is – “only for 60 more days”, however, DURING those 60 days he and Abu Mazen & Obama will “decide on borders” (i.e.: Netanyahu will agree to more withdrawals!) and then Obama will of course say, there’s no point in building if you intend to withdraw from there!

    This is a complete collapse of Netanyahu’s leadership potential and credibility, since both he and all the important ministers have said and explained over and over and over again, both in Israel and abroad, that they will NOT extend the building freeze.

    How can you help? If MAFDAL –Jewish Home – former National Religious Party – announces it will LEAVE the government if the freeze is extended – that will help, because Shas and Yisrael Beytenu will soon follow. This Netanyahu does not want, it happened to him before and he ended up becoming an ex-prime minister. Even his Kadima option will no longer be viable since without the right Netanyahu has no majority and why therefore should Kadima prop him up rather than going to elections. So, the MAFDAL’s departure powerfully threatens Netanyahu’s career.

    Therefore!!! If you are a MAFDAL supporter, SMS or call them IMMEDIATELY (till midnite tonight or from 7 am tomorrow am – scroll up for the telephone numbers) and say: “I voted 4 u!! If you don’t say you’ll leave if freeze is extended, YOU’VE ESTABLISHED A PALESTINIAN STATE WITH YR OWN HANDS!! Don’t just say “we’ll vote against”! Use yr ability to STOP the collapse by declaring you’ll leave!” PLEASE PASS THIS ON – THANK YOU

    Don’t wait for the next Mattot Arim updt, go into our blog anytime http://mattotarim1.blogspot.com

    MAFDAL Knesset members to call:

    Daniel Hershkowitz
    050-6202119

    Zvulun Orlev
    052-3969888

    Uri Orbach
    050-7858073

  2. I lean more towards Yamit’s view on Netanyahu. The freeze was the lastest act of stupidity and we are now seeing how we gained nothing and it has made Israel’s negotiating position worse. The only good thing about the freeze is that it is delaying the negotiations from going forward and for that I am thankful.

    Pinchas

  4. But I do believe that Netanyahu has broad support and would be reelected barring any percipitous thing he might do.

    What does that prove?

    A case can be made that after the elections Obama might move to the center , the economy might improve unemployment might be reduced and he could win in 2012. Does that make him good? A Successful president? A president good for Israel?

    In BB’s case it is popular by default, he has no serious opposition or consensus opponent but few Israelis I know like him, trust him or would vote for him if he had a legitimate opponent in or out of the Likud. Such is the weakness of the Israeli system. We will see what he is really made of after Nov. this year.

    BB reminds me of the PLO. He always does something like shooting himself in the foot, he will again.

  5. I don’t believe I have singled any one out in my articles or posts before. The reason I did it this time is to clarify that you speak in your own name and not mine or Israpundit

    Of course I speak only for myself when I comment. I assumed that was a given. Have your received negative feedback on my comments that caused you to make such a direct and personal statement?

  6. Ted Belman says:
    October 3, 2010 at 5:20 pm

    But I do believe that Netanyahu has broad support and would be reelected barring any percipitous thing he might do.

    Yep. No lack of sheeples in Israel.

    We keep on getting what we ask for.

  7. I don’t believe I have singled any one out in my articles or posts before. The reason I did it this time is to clarify that you speak in your own name and not mine or Israpundit. I do the same when we talk about Christians. There are many people who agree with you. The further right one goes, the more one finds them. But I do believe that Netanyahu has broad support and would be reelected barring any percipitous thing he might do.

  8. Yamit and others have called for Netanyahu’s scalp on these pages, but they do not represent the broad right of center public.

    So tell us what the right of center thinks? What are their views that differ from mine?

    I don’t like Spyer or your friend Rubin. I have found when evaluating their analysis with the benefit of 20/2o hindsight they are mostly wrong.

    It’s not personal just being intellectually honest. I have for ten years criticized Glick a BB groupie and apologist if ever there was one, for giving BB a pass on all his shortcomings and miscues. Only recently has she come around to agreeing with me. I guess we will have to wait for the first nuke to hit us before you change your opinion.

    Apparently you and I read two different critiques of BB and his accomplishments and failure at the half way mark.

    Spyer gives him only two credits of any consequence.

    A- That after he betrayed the real right wing party that allowed him to be nominatrd by Peres, and

    B- That he has managed enough appeasement of the Americans at the expense of the Israeli citzenry to avoid so far, a real break with America.

    Do you want the stats on how much the freeze has cost the Israeli economy?

    Do you want the stats on what the freeze has done to the cost of housing in Jerusalem and the surrounding communities? How much the freeze has cost we Isralis in COL index. If one were to tally up all the direct and indirect costs to the Israeli economy for the last year it would dwarf the aid we receive from America and for more than 1 year.

    America is not so vital to Israel and I can make a better case for breaking with America than you can for not breaking with America.

    If you would like to open a debate as to the efficacy of having America as our Lords and Masters or not. I would welcome debating the subject for breaking our dependency on America.

    The very nature of the policy, however, meant that other than public diplomacy, possible sabotage, the implicit threat of possible Israeli military action, behind the scenes lobbying and presumably an ongoing attempt to monitor the development of the Iranian nuclear project, Israel’s role was basically that of a bystander

    Netanyahu’s tireless public diplomacy against a nuclear Iran has achieved very little. Iran appears to be moving at speed toward a nuclear capability, its uranium enrichment and missile programs proceeding apace.

    Thus, Netanyahu, in the key self-defined objective of preventing a nuclear Iran–which he has referred to as a “hinge of history”–appears to have achieved little of substance as of this writing. Indeed, many analysts concur that unless military action is taken, a nuclear Iran appears to be inevitable.

    At the beginning of his premiership, in a significant speech at Bar-Ilan University in June 2009, the prime minister expressed in clear terms his support in principle for the creation of a Palestinian state.[27] The government subsequently accepted a ten-month moratorium on settlement building at the end of 2009.

    It is considered that concern in the U.S. Democratic Party over the deterioration in relations in the build-up to the Congressional midterm elections in November 2010 may have contributed significantly to Netanyahu’s successful “reset” trip to the United States in July 2010. This of course raises the possibility of a further “reset” in relations after the elections–back in the direction of confrontation. There are persistent rumors that in the absence of progress and a move toward direct talks, the United States may introduce its own plan for Israeli-Palestinian peace next year. Should these rumors prove correct, such a move would serve once more to raise tensions in the relationship between Washington and Jerusalem.

    Thus, in terms of his very low expectations regarding the Israeli-Palestinian track, Netanyahu may be able to look back with some satisfaction. He has succeeded to prevent serious differences on the Palestinian issue from resulting in a profound rupture in relations with the United States.
    .

    The image of Benjamin Netanyahu internationally and to some degree in Israel is of a conviction politician, with a very firm and ideological view of the world. In Israel, however, the prime minister is also popularly viewed as given to indecisiveness, preferring to avoid making major decisions until circumstances effectively force him to do so. The result is a combination of conceptual boldness and clarity with extreme practical caution and avoidance of major initiatives.

    Yet at its halfway point, the second Netanyahu premiership has been characterized by pragmatism, caution, and a general desire to preserve the status quo. This is largely in keeping with his performance in the period from 1996 to 1999. Whatever the inherent merits and demerits of such an approach, it may be asserted with some confidence that it is unlikely to bring about the single most important goal that Netanyahu set himself–namely, the prevention of the emergence of a nuclear Iran.

    I could respond to each line item but will wait to see if anyone else jumps in first.