Trump’s Impeachment Meltdown Accelerates Collapse of Netanyahu’s Iran Strategy

T. Belman.  I disagree with a lot of the author’s critical comments on Netanyahu.  Nevertheless the ME appears up for grabs.

Israelis were astounded this week by the PM’s warning of imminent war with Iran – and by the realization that their hero U.S. president won’t have their backs

Chemi Shalev, HAARETZ

A stoplight in front of a Netanyahu campaign poster, showing him with Trump, Jerusalem, September 14, 2019.
AFP

Saudi Arabia has agreed to launch informal and indirect talks with Iran in an effort to de-escalate rising tensions in the Persian Gulf.

News of the contacts between Riyadh and Tehran would have garnered far more attention in Washington, had it not been overshadowed by U.S. President Donald Trump’s Ukraine impeachment brouhaha, and in Jerusalem, had it not been drowned out by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s increasingly frantic efforts to hold on to power.

Both Trump and Netanyahu should be satisfied that reports of rapprochement between the Middle East’s two great rivals have been pushed to the sidelines. It is, after all, proof of their joint failure: According to reports from the Saudi court, the kingdom’s decision to engage Tehran reflects its assessment that Trump has undermined the U.S. ability to deter Iran through the threat of military force. In Middle East terms, the U.S. president is now seen as a paper tiger.

Netanyahu gave expression to this new strategic reality in his Knesset speech last week, in which he warned of an imminent danger of confrontation with Iran, possibly within a few short weeks. Tehran, he said, has expanded its terror operations and its aggressive designs on Israel. In the face of such a clear and present danger, Netanyahu said, Israel would have to siphon many billions of civilian dollars into its military budget in order to meet the Iranian threat.

Netanyahu did not mention Trump in his speech. He didn’t laud the U.S. president’s courageous decision to abandon the Iran nuclear deal, as he often has in the past, or Trump’s steadfast stance against Tehran’s sinister designs.

Israelis, who had been reassured by Netanyahu that his brilliant plan had put Tehran on the defensive, were surprised to hear that Iran suddenly posed a threat on par with the 1973 Yom Kippur War. They were doubly flummoxed at Netanyahu’s suggestion that in this existential battle, Israel is all alone.

Netanyahu’s war-hype has been widely interpreted as yet another cynical political ploy aimed at pressuring Benny Gantz and Kahol Lavan into joining a national unity government led by Netanyahu. Be that as it may, Netanyahu’s Knesset speech highlighted the collapse of his entire Iran strategy, though he will be the last to admit it.

Trump tells reporters that he refuses to cooperate with an impeachment investigation in Congress, October 4, 2019.
Trump tells reporters that he refuses to cooperate with an impeachment investigation in Congress, October 4, 2019. AFP

The fatal flaw in Netanyahu’s game plan was obvious to anyone who took Trump’s measure from the outset. It wrongly assumed that the U.S. president could be a stable and dependable partner in advancing Netanyahu’s game plan. It posited that Trump recognized the threat Iran poses to both Israel and the U.S. and that his utmost priority would be to quell it. It did not take into account Trump’s isolationist tendencies or that his only real priority is promoting himself.

Netanyahu’s confidence was bolstered by Trump’s recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and his decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. Along with Trump’s May 2018 abandonment of the nuclear deal, the two largely declarative gestures were perceived as positive proof of Trump’s commitment to the Jewish state.

Turning a blind eye to Trump’s erratic handling of other foreign policy hot spots, no one in Netanyahu’s immediate surroundings dared suggest that the president’s overtures towards Israel, which enraged the international community, were simply manifestations of his reckless handling of foreign affairs overall.

Trump’s June 20 last minute decision to recall a U.S. strike against Iran in retaliation for the downing of an American drone marked a line in the sand. His abrupt order to abort, taken without consultation with any of his foreign policy principals, indicated his deep reservations about using U.S. military might and fear of getting entangled in another Middle East conflict. It also highlighted Trump’s utter cluelessness about the potential regional ramifications of his move and the damage it would inflict on U.S. prestige and power of deterrence.

Thus, 17 months after Trump delighted Netanyahu and other anti-Iranian leaders in the Middle East by abandoning the deal, U.S. policy is in shambles. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries, including the staunchly pro-Trump United Arab Emirates, are recalculating their approach to Iran. Without a dependable U.S. ally willing to flex its muscles, accommodation with Tehran suddenly seems like a better option than confrontation.

Iran’s economy may be crippled by tightening U.S. sanctions, but its leadership remains as belligerent as ever. Trump’s ability to muster an international coalition similar to those set up by his predecessors, from George Bush Sr. to Barack Obama, has been undermined by his hostile attitude to Western European allies. And his embroilment in the Ukraine brouhaha is now making a bad situation far worse.

For the remainder of his term, the president will be preoccupied with his campaign to undermine impeachment proceedings in the House by any means possible. His fight for survival in Congress will dovetail with an election campaign that promises to be harsher and nastier than any of its precedents.

Conflict with Iran, even if it abandons any pretense of adhering to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, is fraught with risks and dangers to Trump’s reelection efforts, rendering it virtually moot. Trump’s only trump card in the election campaign is the health of the U.S. economy, which could be dramatically reversed in the case of an all-out war in the Middle East.

Netanyahu attends the swearing-in ceremony of the 22nd Knesset, October 3, 2019.
Netanyahu attends the swearing-in ceremony of the 22nd Knesset, October 3, 2019. \ RONEN ZVULUN/ REUTERS

Netanyahu’s ability to sway Trump to refocus on stemming Iranian aggression is limited in any case. The White House is well aware that the Israeli prime minister’s political future is foggy, at best, and finished, at worst.

By the time Trump comes around to soliciting Netanyahu’s help in the 2020 campaign in return for the presidential bounty he has heaped on him throughout his term, he could very well find a different and far less accommodating occupant in the prime minister’s office. Just when Trump hoped to exploit Netanyahu’s good standing and influence with Trump’s evangelical base, the prime minister could be otherwise engaged as a defendant facing trial in an Israeli court.

And to think that for this strategic train wreck, Netanyahu estranged Democrats, alienated American Jews, distanced himself from liberal public opinion, and introduced new tensions in Israel’s already problematic relations with other Western countries.

Netanyahu embraced Trump without reservation, up to and including tacit support for presidential manifestations of anti-Semitism. He dubbed him an Israeli hero, the greatest pro-Israel president to ever reside in the White House. He turned Israel into Trump’s cheerleading squad, alone among the nations, and Israelis into Trump’s enthusiastic groupies. He embraced Trump’s disdain for checks and balances, the rule of law and freedom of the press and imported his corrupt values, further eroding Israeli public opinion’s confidence in democracy in government and demand for honesty and integrity at the top.

Netanyahu’s grand failure on Iran may seem like a lesser sin than his authoritarian attempts to seize control of Israeli democracy, his complete subjugation of Israel’s ruling party or his corruption of Israel’s very soul, but circumstances could soon change the hierarchy.

With Netanyahu gone, Israel could slowly start to recuperate, mend its ways and return to normalcy, but a war with Iran that is a direct outgrowth of Trump’s incoherent foreign policy could devastate Israel long after Netanyahu is gone. A potentially disastrous confrontation – one that could have been avoided had Netanyahu played his cards more carefully and less arrogantly – could turn out to be Netanyahu’s only lasting legacy.

October 7, 2019 | 9 Comments »

Leave a Reply

9 Comments / 9 Comments

  1. @ Edgar G.: LeShana Tovah, Edgar! May it be a sweet and happy New Year for you and all your loved ones. If you fast today and tomorrow, have an easy one.

    The media “spin” that this was a big surprise and a sudden change in policy by Trump is nonsense. Trump announced his intention to withdraw from Syria a full year ago. His phone call to Erdogan merely signaled the conclusion of this gradual process. Trump is a man of peace. Always has been. Does not like to use force to solve problems with other nations. Uses sanctions instead. Is always open to negotiations with adversaries, without whitewashing their misdeeds. Right or wrong that has been his consistent policy.

  2. @ Adam Dalgliesh:

    I just heard Trump on a youtube news video, when he was asked about the troop withdrawal. He said there are only 50-fifty- US Troops left there, that they have been gradually withdrawn for quite a while. that he also told Erdogan that he expects him to deal gently and peqcefully with the people in the area. etc.etc.

    Who knows what’s what , ….until it happens.

  3. If Yochanan Visser, writing in Arutz Sheva, is accurate, Trump has not given Turkey quite as complete a carte blancheas the American Press is claiming. He has threatened to “destry Turkey’s economy” if Turkish troops do anythiing he considers beyond the pale. In addition, he is probably aware that not only the Kurds, but also Assad’s men and even possibly the Russians, are prepared to fight Turkish soldiers on the side of the Kurds.

    ANALYSIS: Trump creates a new war zone in Syria
    Pro-Assad, Russian forces prepare to face Turkish forces as US withdrawal clears way for new conflict.
    Yochanan Visser, 07/10/19 22:06

    The United States “is hatching a new war zone in northern Syria” read the headline above a report about US President Trump’s sudden decision to withdraw his military from what is called by the Kurds Rojava, the Kurdish autonomous cantons along the Turkish border in Syria.

    Trump apparently took the decision without consulting anyone and after a telephone conversation with Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan who is the only world leader who considers the Kurds of the Syrian Democratic Forces ‘terrorists’.

    Following the latest reports about the developments in northern Syria one could say the headline hit the nail on the head.

    Trump’s new reversal of long-standing US policy regarding Syria triggered severe criticism by experts on the situation in The Middle East and many Republicans while the Israeli government kept mum on the move.

    One of these expert critics was Brett McGurk the former special US envoy for the war against Islamic State who called the decision “a sad replay” of Trump’s earlier decision to pull out all US Special Forces from Syria which led to McGurk’s resignation in 2018.

    McGurk wrote on Twitter that “there’s a similar defect at the core of US foreign policies across the board: maximalist objectives for a minimalist president combined with no process to assess facts, develop options, or prepare contingencies” and warned that US military personnel in Syria “are left exposed at the slightest moment of friction.”

    The former US envoy also pointed to the fact that Turkey will now take over the al-Hol refugee camp where ISIS has created a mini Caliphate and that will most likely lead to the resurgence of ISIS in Syria.

    Trump, from his side defended his decision by falsely accusing the Syrian Kurds of ‘fighting Turkey for decades” and reminded the public that the US had paid “massive amounts of money” to the Syrian Kurds and equipped them with many weapons.

    “It is time for us to get out of these ridiculous Endless Wars, many of them tribal,” Trump tweeted.

    The Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces who effectively won the war against ISIS in Syria reacted furiously and without saying so made clear that they feel the US had betrayed them and exposed them to Turkish aggression.

    “All of our commitments to remove military fortifications between Tell Abyad and Sari Kani, withdraw combat forces with heavy weapons, risking a security vacuum as a result of the agreement,” the SDF said in a statement which referred to an agreement between Turkey and the US about the creation of a so-called safe zone in northern Syria.

    A Turkish government official now says that Turkey cannot wait “a minute longer” to launch the long-anticipated “counter-terror operation” in Syria.

    “Syria needs local governance not the PKK’s occupation.” he claimed referring to the outlawed Kurdish Workers Party in Turkey which is fighting an endless war with the regime of Erdogan.

    Local Syrian media already report about a new refugee problem as the direct result of the American decision.

    Scores of Syrians are leaving their homes in panic as the SDF threatened all-out-war whenever Erdogan makes good on his promises and launches the new incursion in Rojava.

    “We will not hesitate to turn any unprovoked attack by Turkey into an all-out war on the entire border to defend ourselves and our people,” an SDF spokesman said in a statement.

    The same media reported that US Special Forces have already begun leaving the SDF-controlled border region and that the Russian-Iranian-backed pro-Assad coalition reacted by filling the vacuum near the city of Manbij.

    Trump’s decision sets the pro-Assad coalition on a crash course with the Turkish army since Assad regards Turkey’s presence in Syria as illegal and as an occupation which can be fought using all means.

    Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem earlier accused Turkey of providing “terrorists with all forms of support, including weapons that are more sophisticated”.

    He was referring to Islamist rebels in the Idlib Province which are supported by the Erdogan regime.

    Al-Muallem indicated last Friday that the pro-Assad coalition is determined to ‘liberate’ Syria from the last terrorist and would get rid of “foreign-sponsored Takfiri militants” a reference to the Turkish sponsored Islamist rebels in Syria.

    According to the al-Masdar news site, Russian troops are already deploying in northern and eastern Syria to block the intended Turkish invasion.

    On social media multiple videos showed the build-up of Assad’s forces in the border region after news broke that the US troops would pull out of the area.

    Trump, meanwhile, seemed to realize he had made a sort of mistake and indulged in damage-control.

    The President threatened to destroy Turkey’s already ailing economy whenever Erdogan makes good on his threats to invade Syria again.

    The US would “obliterate” Turkey’s economy if Ankara does anything that, in his “great and unmatched wisdom,” he considers to be “off-limits” in Syria, the US President wrote in a new Tweet.

    Trump has never hid the fact that one of his missions is to end U.S. involvement in foreign wars.

    Trump’s policy is nothing new. He announced his intention to do this as much as a year ago, but postponed acting because of objections from the Pentagon and John Bolton. Having fired Bolton, he has now decided to go ahead with his original plan.

    Trump’s policy in Syria can be summarized as “Let’s you and him fight.” He is happy to have the Turks, the Russians, the Kurds, and Assad all fighting each other.I believe that he hopes they will all exhaust each other, which will leave the way open for an American or joint American-Israeli takeover of Syria.

  4. This the article in Ynetnews that I was trying to describe in my “moderated” (removed) previous comment.

    Is Israel facing the biggest conflict since Yom Kippur War?

    The words “sixth of October” send chills down the spine even 46 years later. Or, at least they should, assuming that the lessons of the 1973 Yom Kippur War (that started on this date) have been learned and internalized.

    On Sunday, just days before yet another Yom Kippur, the political-security cabinet was to meet for the first time since the September elections (despite the endless political turmoil Israel has found itself in since the national vote) to discuss a “sensitive situation.”

    At this point it’s impossible to know whether there is actually something serious or it’s yet another political spin. Because everything feels like it’s still part of an election campaign. The bottom line is although I wish it was all a spin, I still want the issues discussed there to be serious.

    There are two disturbing similarities between 1973 and 2019. The first is that there is a ruling political party that in the eyes of a sizeable chunk of the public is invincible and can get away with practically anything. The second is the fact that defense intelligence is being made public – if you only open your eyes and look closely.

    Anwar Sadat, who at the time was Egypt’s president, a year before the war described in a detailed interview to Newsweek how one and a half million of Egyptian soldiers were preparing for a war that his regime could not escape.

    Like Sadat, many speeches of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah also give away his main operational objectives with regards to Israel – occupation of the Upper Galilee, accompanied by heavy rocket fire.

    The alleged Iranian attack on Saudi oil fields, however, shows that Israel has spent years learning to neutralize weapons of wars we had already fought. We built anti-ballistic missile defense systems, while the Iranians were developing cruise missiles.

    Although the pinnacle of our defense establishment has recorded hundreds of great accomplishments, what about the infantry or armored brigades? Will the home front cope if there’s an all-out war?

    However you want to spin it, a war against Iran and its regional proxies is inevitable. According to the intelligence (which at this point has practically been made public) the war will include heavy rocket fire from Gaza, Iran (and the territory under its influence in Iraq), Syria and Lebanon – where ground battles will also be fought.

    Are we prepared to face a prolonged bombardment of our civilian population? Will we be able to withstand precision-missile hits that would break our morale?

    Israel in 2019, just like in 1973, is a captive of its own concept. This time, however, it is a political concept: a package of fossilized perceptions about the left vs the right; ultra-Orthodox vs secular; Arabs vs Jews, that dictates who will vote for whom in the polls, and who will sit with whom in a coalition government.

    All of this political bickering puts us in a vulnerable position where the next war will shake us like we have not been shaken since those sirens rang on October 6, 1973.

  5. Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    Ted, this sounds very ominous. Is there something wrong with my last comment?

  6. Is Israel facing the biggest conflict since Yom Kippur War?

    Please this article in ynetnews, by someone named Assaf Schneider. Don’t know much about him. But he provides credible information about the severity of the threat Israel faces from Iran, Hizbollah and Hamas, and Israel’s lack of preparedness to meet the threat. Considers war with these allies inevitable. The author is concerned that all those enemy missiles will mean very heavy casualties for Israeli civilians. And he doubts that the Israeli population is pschologically prepared to deal with this.

  7. Much as I dislike Haaretz, much of this is true. Israel is increasingly vulnerable to an all-out attack by Iran, Hizbollah, Hamas, the Assad Regime, and quite possibly Russia. Despite the common belief that Israel and Russia have an understanding, I notice that RT and Sputnik News, both unofficial outlets for Russian government opinion, are very anti-Israel and pro”Palestinian.” Having cut back on troop strength over a several year period, Israel is poorly prepared for war. It is becoming clear that Israel will be alone in such a war. No direct US assistance or intervention is to be expected. Trump does not intend to take military action against Iran. He does not even intend to prevent Turkey from wiping out the Kurds. The Gulf states have no choice but to make a deal with Iran. That means they will end their detente and security cooperation with Israel. As Betty Davis said in some classic movie or other, “Be prepared for a bumpy ride.”