• Published 23:25 19.02.09
  • Latest update 23:27 19.02.09

Indyk: Netanyahu may seek Syria deal to deflect U.S. pressure

Ex-U.S. envoy to Israel: One of Bill Clinton's biggest mistakes was to become too involved in Israeli politics.

By Natasha Mozgovaya Tags: Benjamin Netanyahu US Israel news

Former U.S. ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk said Thursday that he believes that should Likud Chairman Benjamin Netanyahu become Israel's next prime minister, he "will try to deflect American pressure by seeking a deal with Syrians"

Indyk, who was born to a Jewish family in England but grew up primarily in Australia, has made a career of Middle East diplomacy and support for Israel. Among other entries on an impressive resume, he has worked at AIPAC, founded the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and served two stints as U.S. envoy to Israel.

His terms as U.S. ambassador to Israel coincided with Netanyahu's truncated term as prime minister between 1996 and 1999.

According to Indyk, Netanyahu will not seek peace with Syria "because he wants to avoid the concessions in the West Bank, but because there is a strategic rationale in backing a deal with Syria. This deal is an interesting deal ? territories not for peace, but territories for Syrian realignment, leaving the Iranian sphere of influence. Netanyahu believes it will be attractive to the Israeli public and for Obama's administration."

Speaking during a panel on Israel's recent elections at the Brookings Institution in Washington, Indyk said "back in the 90s, we had a fairly intimate, although a bit bumpy relationship," he recalled Netanyahu's administration, using the former prime minister's nickname Bibi. "The consequences of Bibi's approach got him into considerable trouble with [then U.S. President Bill] Clinton and brought tension to U.S.-Israel relations."

"The consequence of Bibi's consent to hand over 13.1 percent of the West Bank to Yasser Arafat ? Bibi's government collapsed soon after. Netanyahu remembers this episode very well. I had a conversation with him four months ago, when he said that Barack Obama will be the next president of the U.S., and he'll be the next prime-minister of Israel and added 'we'll make beautiful music together.'"

"I reminded him of past episodes, and he told me that the mistake was not to form a National Unity government with Shimon Peres when he [Netanyahu] defeated him, and 'this time I'll do it and it will settle all.'"

Indyk said that Netanyahu would probably prefer to form National Unity government with Labor, not Kadima - "He would like to grind up Kadima, so Likud will be stronger," he said.

One of Bill Clinton's biggest mistakes, said Indyk, was to become "too involved" in Israeli politics. "The prolonged involvement of the U.S. in the region shows that we push one door - and the other opens. We should set the course and see what opportunity arises. My sense is that Bibi will go with the Syrians. To try to move Israeli-Palestinian negotiations forward - that must include a real settlement freeze and blocking terror on the Palestinian side, and also holding out an open hand to Iranians, if they want to be a part of this process."

"I think Obama made very clear during the campaign his steadfast commitment to Israel's survival. But he also?said he doesn't have to support the right-wing parties [in Israel], and I suspect the biggest test will come with the question of the settlement freeze, especially with narrow right-wing coalition."

Addressing a possible reconciliation between rival Palestinian factions Fatah and Hamas, Indyk said that "America would like to see national unity government with both sides. Do we continue Bush's policy and block such reconciliation? I don't think we should stand in the way of such an effort."

Regarding the approaching elections in Lebanon, Indyk noted that "a coalition that will give Hezbollah control of the government - from the Israeli perspective it's not such a bad thing, because for them it will be easier to deter a government than a terrorist organization. Regarding the peace negotiations ? the issues between Israel and Lebanon are few - Shebaa farms which can easily be resolved, there's no reason for Israel to hold on them. The deal is there. It's important to get these negotiations going, because it's in American interest to preserve Lebanon?s independence."

On Iran, Indyk said that it seems that "Israel is willing to give diplomacy a chance, maybe for tactical reasons - to let Obama understand that it doesn't work, and then get to sanctions. They appear to give it a chance. I sense that this horizon has stretched a bit."

  • Print Page
  • Send to a friend
  • Share
  • Text Size +|-
 
 
TalkBacks

Why Facebook Connect?

Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.

Add a comment

Add your reply