Obama's turnabout
President Barack Obama's campaign of wooing Israel reflects a fundamental about-face in U.S. policy in the Middle East. U.S. priorities have changed: At the top are the intensifying problem of Iran and concerns about the change of leadership in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
By Aluf BennPresident Barack Obama's campaign of wooing Israel reflects a fundamental about-face in U.S. policy in the Middle East. U.S. priorities have changed: At the top are the intensifying problem of Iran and concerns about the change of leadership in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Under such circumstances, Israel is perceived as a "vital ally," in the words of U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro, and not an obstacle to warmer ties between the United States and the Muslim world, as was the view at the start of Obama's tenure.
The Americans have a supreme interest in the Middle East; it's an available and inexpensive supply of oil that powers the economies of the United States and its allies. Protecting it depends on preserving "stability," which relies on totalitarian regimes whose survival depends on the United States. In turn, defending these regimes provides important markets for the U.S. defense industry.
Since taking responsibility for the defense of the Middle East from Britain, and with the announcement of the Eisenhower Doctrine in 1957 following the Suez Crisis, the United States has fought off every element that sought to undermine regional order and threatened the oil supply - from Gamal Abdel Nasser and his Soviet patrons to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.
Israel has played a varying role in American strategy. Sometimes it was seen as an asset, other times as a burden. During the best of times the Americans highlighted the "special relationship" and the "shared values." In bad times they picked on Israel over its Dimona nuclear reactor, and later over the settlements. This approach is commonplace for them: When the Americans needed China against the Soviet Union, they ignored both Mao's human rights violations and Taiwan. When China was perceived as an economic threat, the United States announced that it was selling arms to Taiwan, officially hosted the Dalai Lama, and acknowledged that there was censorship in Beijing and opponents of the regime were being persecuted.
In relations with Israel, the settlements play the role that Taiwan and Tibet play in relations with China - a permanent problem that is emphasized or ignored depending on need. Are they angry with the prime minister? They remember Sheikh Jarrah and Yitzhar. Do they need Israel, or do they want to caress it because of yet another bit of pseudo-progress in the peace process? They back off the Judea and Samaria planning committee.
When Obama came into office he assessed that the United States had been weakened in the Middle East and hoped to reach an agreement on sharing influence with the regional power, Iran. So he cooled toward Israel and pulled out of the closet the well-worn club called settlements. But that didn't work. The Iranians waved off Obama's goodwill gesture, and the Arab states ignored the Palestinian issue and made it clear that blocking Iran was more important. As the United Arab Emirates ambassador to Washington said at a conference last week: "A military attack on Iran by whomever would be a disaster, but Iran with a nuclear weapon would be a bigger disaster."
This is the reason for the turnabout in Obama's approach. Instead of "beat on Israel and gain the applause of the Muslims," the stance on Iran is toughening. Sanctions on Tehran have become tougher, and the rhetoric has become more blunt. Israel has moved from being a burden to a welcome partner, perhaps because there is no choice in view of the expected instability in Cairo and Riyadh with the changes at the top.
Cooperation with the Israel Defense Forces has become closer and the Americans have opted to emphasize it, unlike their tendency in the past of playing it down. Israel has become a hit in Washington to the point where Shapiro, who praised the defense relationship, went as far as to mention two presidents, John Adams and his son John Quincy Adams, for supporting a Jewish homeland decades before Herzl. Zionism was born at the White House, and we had no idea.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has scored a diplomatic achievement. During his first meeting with Obama he tried to convince him that the Iranian threat was paramount, and Obama demanded that he not build in East Jerusalem. Now the president declares that Iran's nuclear program "has been my number one foreign policy priority over the course of the last 18 months," and made no mention of the settlements as he sat next to Netanyahu.
This did not happen for nothing: Netanyahu promised in return that within a year he will have a permanent settlement, and is signaling that the weight of the blow on Iran will be reflected in the extent of the concessions Israel makes. And if this belated love also helps Obama and his party in the upcoming congressional elections, the deal will be worthwhile in his view.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Nothing more nothing less
For OIL as the number one source of energy in the world is coming to an end, one way or another. If the OIL-flow flow Arabia no longer is vital for the world economies to spin around and thus Israel neither is burden nor asset anymore, it will be finally all on it's own.
White House has made an assessment that Netanyahu cant deliver. Being rough on him is useless and detrimental to mid-term elections. The messages being sent behind the scenes to Iran via Turkey - which Israel has no clue - are the real movement in the Middle East.
This article openly says what all Middle-Easteners have been saying for years. Israel helps US keep a stranglehold on the Middle East. "Jewish" state in exchange for oil. Through the other side of the mouth, Israel talks about democracy. Just like England and France did in the colonial era.
Just think first on my caption and take it from there. All this cozying is nothing but appeasing US Jews and the slumbering Israeli leaders,or writers like Benn up there in the ivory tower. And yes,the US needs a democratic country like Israel it can count on.The oil is another matter of course,that not only the US needs it but so do the rest of the western countries who are still dealing with Iran.That shows their patent hypocrisy That is it.But I just arrived before I send this may I once again congratulate Chafeeka's response full of truth and wisdom.
here we don't trust him Some swear he is the AntiChirst.
Shapiro and his ilk want America to stand for cheap oil. I say America should stand for freedom, justice and equality. We should pay a fair price for the oil and not take it by force. In actuality, Shapiro's stance is deeply subversive of America's real national security interests. He supports a "long war" against what he calls terrorism but what is actually Arab resistance against the theft of their natural resources and their sovereignty. If Shaprio's policy prevails, they will fight us, and they will win, just as Vietnam won.
Please let me know what Israel has done for the US lately (or ever)? It's a hard fact to swallow, but no Arabs ever terrorized the US prior to 1968, when the US began actively supporting Israel on an unprecedented level. It's obvious we've taken on a guilt by association for Israel... now, where is the tit for tat?
This is about and only about the Israel lobby and American elections. Everybody wants that money. And Shapiro is just another Israeli agent in the US government, one of too many to count.
The author is wrong. U.S. Jews vote and donate more than most Americans and donate hugely to the Democrats. Alienating Israel alienates Jewish voters. Pressure on Obama from fellow Democrat leaders has TEMPORARILY moderated the administration's hostility toward Israel. This moderation will end on November 3, 2010. To those that don't like Jewish influence, tough. We have a constitution/First Amendment and Jews use their freedom to vote what they perceive to be in their interests as does every other voting bloc (NRA, AARP, Oil Companies, etc.). If you disagree, you are free to vote and donate your way. No point debating Israel's status as U.S. ally. The anti-Zionists' comments are biased, ignorant, and irrelevant. There is a palpable symbiosis between the U.S. and Israel. It has pluses and minuses. You anti-Zionists can see only one side. (I'd be happy to see an Israel free of U.S. influence.)
You shouldn't keep trying to make this about American/Israeli relations. Netanyahu has managed to fight off Obama's peace move, because current internal US politics make Obama unable to oppose AIPAC and the New York Times. All American presidents eventually walk away from Israel with a bitter taste in their moth. The taste of failure and futility. It just happened to Obama sooner than the others. Israel should stop deceiving itself (that seems to be a hopeless task.) Nothing good is going to come of Obama's change of heart. He's gone from seeing Israel as being his hope for bringing peace to the, to feeling that Israel will be a constant thorn in his side and he will do his best to ignore it. Forget peace, Obama has, and get prepared for the stasis manuvers America makes to keep Israel's rightist government from causing crisis. It's strange that Israel takes so much pride in their current influence over American politics. The fact that friendship, respect and the American peace effort are all dying doesn't seem to be bothering people. In the US we keep questioning ourselves about our motivations regarding Obama. How much of this is a schwartzer thing?
..to the USA and recent meetings at the White house has not reduced the burden. We (US taxpayers) give so much to Israel and the country's and government's response and appreciation is severely lacking.
As an illustration, the US is giving as much to Egypt and gets in return hatred, disrespect and some nice names in the Egyptian media. This is "throwing good money after bad money" 101. So what about that money?
Israel receives the most aid, by billions of dollars, from the US than ANY other country. Egyptians do not get nearly as much. And indeed, the money given to Egypt goes into Mubarak's pockets to oppress his own people and to support Zionist policies against Arabs. The very reason why that money sows discord against the US.
How much does the defense of South Korea cost? Plus US soldiers are at risk, not just the dollars. How about defense of Europe through Nato? What does that cost? US defense aid to Israel mostly goes to US weapons manufactures = US jobs + a stable and greatful ally.
Egypt is not getting anywhere near what israel is getting in financial aid, it is a lot less and it has stipulations attached to it where Israel's aid has no stipulations and Israel insisted on it being called "grant" instead of "aid" for just that reason to be able to use it as it pleases
you apparantly are talking about some other obama and not the president of the usa. he has changed his stance on Israel if anything he has become more hostile. oh by the way i am not jewish or an Israeli so you forget about trying to make out like i am just prejudice. i am an american an this president is in the proccess of destroying our country. his hatred of Israel is blatant and you have forcefully blind yourself to the truth if you cant see it.
If you focus on facts instead of propaganda, you'll see in a second that Obama is a blessing for Israel. So instead of taking the naive line that Obama hates Israel b/c neocon whackjobs say so, look @ the facts instead: 1. Obama approved $30 billion over the next 10 years in aid to Israel 2. Under Obama's direction the US rejected the absurd Goldstone report 3. Under Obama's direction the US had the biggest ever Israel-US bilateral military exercises 4. Obama allowed for tens of billions of dollars worth of the latest military tech to be sold to Israel, something Israel's supposed friend GW Bush did not allow 5. Look at who Obama's top advisors are - VP Biden has a flawless record of championing pro-Israel legislation during his 40 yrs in the Senate, and chief of staff Emanuel comes from Israeli parents & served in the IDF
If Obama is worried about stability and cheap oil in the mideast, confronting Iran and schmoozing Israel are exactly the opposite of how to achieve that goal. No nation is better placed and better motivated than Iran to turn the mideast on its head, collapsing American efforts in iraq and tripling the cost of oil overnight. Giving more and more weapons to Israel is a provocation to the entire region. Obama is headed for epic failure, but, at least, he will put a smile on the faces of Israelis.
Owe the USA the right of refusal to oil A gurantee against oil embargos and should other states put an embargo to make up the difference for USA demand from its own private reserves
Obama is an epic failure, on all counts, but the big three: unemployment, Afghanistan, BP. He is like the prison inmate whom all the other inmates are walking by stealing food from and it's too late to complain. And who was the first inmate to humiliate inmate Obama? None other than the combination of Bibi Netanyahu/Ehud Olmert.
Yes to think of Israel as an ally is a complete joke. I have more trust in the Turks than Israel. My idea of an ally is one that is willing to shed blood in a great encounter. Last time I looked Israel was never in the Korean war, the turks were with their Turkish Brigrade that saved americans lives at the battle of Kunuri in North Korea and are now with us in Afghanstan. Israel never was never in Vietnam or any of the gulf wars or in Iraq or Afghanstan. Yet I am told this country suppose to be my ally. Its laughable when this is told to me. The relationship is one sided with Israel getting the best part of the deal. One of the reasons we are in the Middle East outside of the oil is because of Israel. You tax our resources with your constant spoiled rants and demands. Personally I think America would be better off without this so called "ally".
You must remember that Israel was forced to sit out the gulf wars ( so as not to offend the muslim members of the coalition ) and in fact Israel had to sit on its hands and absorb scud missiles as an innocent bystander. Only a very true and strong ally indeed would
The same Turkey that denied the US airspace in the war plus is cozying up tyo Iran.
Israel is the US's only stable ally in the region. Who else can the US count on? When new Israeli leaders are elected, though specific policies may change, there is no question that Israel will remain an ally of the US. You can't say the same thing about the other Arab and Muslim countries? What will happen when Mubarak in Egypt is no longer in power? What happens if the Muslim Brotherhood takes over and creates a Islamic fundamentalist state? Will Iraq continue to support the US after it leaves? What happened to Iran which was a staunch US ally? Its change to an Islamic fundamentalist state had nothing to do with the Arab-Israel conflict. How about Jordan who supported Iraq in the first US-Iraq war? How about Syria that supports the insurgency in Iraq? Saudi Arabia who exports Islamic fundamentalism around the world? Lebanon? Libya who blew up a civilian jet over Scottland? How about Turkey whose government is building stronger ties with Iran and who, with Iran, recently attacked Kurds in Iraq? DOes the US want allys like Hezbollah and Hamas? Look 10-20 years from now. Who would you like to bet on for being a US Ally? My bet would be on Israel
The US doesn't need Israel. It's not clear how the US actually benefits from a relationship with a country that costs them billions of dollars each year in financial aid and can only ever weaken its relationships with other countries in the region like Saudi Arabia, that the US needs to be on good terms with to maintain its energy security (e.g. the 1973 War and the oil embargo that almost crippled the US military in SE Asia). Israel is a 'strategic burden' on the US.
Unfortunately Jake is pretty right on. Israel's settlement/occupation policies have caused major negative burdens for US policy in the Middle East. Our foremost interest continues to be oil supply security and that is not in Israel. A backlash against Israeli militarism is growing in the United States.
The Arab world did not give a damn about the Palestinians when they were under the boot of Egypt ( Gaza ) and Jordon (West Bank ). Notice how easily they gave up the territory in peace agreements with Israel. This is not about land. This is about people and religion.
You write: " Who else can the US count on?" Count on the Israelis? To what?? Repeatedly stab us in the back? Take our money? Make fools of us again and again in the eyes of the world? Am I missing something?
The change in his stance towards Iran was the natural course should diplomacy not work, the Arab states being so concerned with Iran's nuclear goals doesn't diminish any concern over the Palestinian issue - which actually places Israel in even more of a position of liability to U.S. goals - and a change of leadership in Egypt, while it 'might' bring problems, isn't necessarily going to change that much...but even if it DID, Israel's policies would be even more of a liability, still. Really - it's all over the upcoming elections. Things will pick up again afterwards.
you are correct. israel is like an annoying wart to the US - an irritant and ugly to look at but also hard to make it budge
Aluf, you hit the nail right on the head, no ifs or buts in it, it is the oil, and the oil alone. Rights, democracy, love & RR, peace..blah blah, are all buzz words the USA had always dished on us, the Arabs, to dilute the prception of thier actual intention: CHEAP AND STABLE SUPPLY OF OIL BY ANY COST. you & i, BiBi, and many like us do understand the equation, However, does Abu Mazen and co. understand it? I doubt it. my conclusion (and yours, must be:)) the cycle of violence will prevail & continue between us and the evil axle Zionism-west, until the cows come home. (and I doubt if they ever would come home!) hence, prepare for more bloodshed in the near and long future. As for BiBi, I do not think he (to that, any Zionist PM) will ever give up one inch of "Judea and Samaria", mark my words.
JUdea and Samaria is not ARab Land the land didnt belong to anyone Jordan took possession of it without consulting anyone when Palestine region was subdivided as far as give and take what Palestinians give>????? they are so used to taking they forget its not a take situation in their favor anymore....
i don't think its big news that what leads world policy is money, not morals. You do a great job bashing US/Israel/West but seem to forget this picture is no less true for the west's enemies. Iran foments in Israel, but when was the last time an Iranian died fighting for the Pals? Same goes with Saddam's Iraq etc. Even the Turks, who are now the big heros of the Arab street - they were allies of israel for the last 60 years because it suited their interests, they are now Israel's enemies, virtually overnight, because their interests have changed. So while very eloquent, the thrust of everything you say applies equally to just about every anti-west/anti-zionist country. Sorry to burst your pure bubble.
It takes time for some to perceive the light through the tunnel,but eventually they come out into the open.
So, in order to defend the Middle East, formerly Britain, and now America have to prop up dictators and sell them weaponary. And then they innocently ask: "Why do they hate us?"
This rapprochment is something about political conjuncture and it is not wise to present it as a success. Constraint of Iran and Israel's efforts for achieving the peace are the real parameters for political success.