Obama's Anti-Israel Posture Undermining The Peace Process, Hardening Palestinian Demands
At first I was hopeful that academics could at least use Obama's Middle East peacemaking for textbook chapters like "how not to conduct negotiations." Then I realized that case studies are only really useful when there are one or two notable features and everything else is held constant. When you're Obama and you've repeatedly screwed up in ways unimaginable only a few months ago - that's just plain useless.
Ehud Olmert, April 2008:
It was clear from day one to Abbas, Rice and Bush that construction would continue in population concentrations - the areas mentioned in Bush's 2004 letter... I say this again today: Beitar Illit will be built, Gush Etzion will be built; there will be construction in Pisgat Ze'ev and in the Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem. It's clear that these areas will remain under Israeli control in any future settlement.
Despite this oh-so-outrageous-outrage, the Palestinians kept negotiating. They negotiated so much that they actually started bragging about the progress they were making. And why not? Everyone's assumed for a long time that Israel has a free hand in the West Bank areas that will remain Israeli in any future deal.
Then Obama decided to deploy some of his smart power.
First he went out of his way to overturn past Us assurances about the settlement blocs. Above and beyond destroying all trust that any ally could ever have in US guarantees, the weird move also had the upshot of causing the Palestinians to incoproate that into their negotiating stance:
Abbas [restated] the PLO's expectations of a complete return to pre-1967 borders, the right of return of Palestinians to Israel proper, and Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, and in addition demanded a complete freeze of construction in the Jewish communities strewn around the West Bank. Toameh said that the Palestinians, like Netanyahu, were looking to buy time."I think they know that nothing is going to come out of these talks and they see the clash between Netanyahu and Obama," he said, adding that the Palestinians secretly hoped their position might increase pressure by the Obama administration on Israel.
That new total freeze precondition was given as the excuse for rejecting Netanyahu's offer to resume peace negotiations.
Then Obama - having demanded a freeze on all settlement construction - upended decades of implicit understandings and declared that East Jerusalem is a settlement just like any other. Which is to say, construction in East Jerusalem had to be frozen as well. This was pure imperial whimsy on Obama's part. The State Department doesn't even count East Jerusalem neighborhoods when they tabulate settlements. He basically made it up.
The Palestinians reacted - surprise - by adopting that the demand as a precondition:
The Palestinian Authority is hoping that the intervention of the US State Department with Israel to halt a construction project in Jerusalem's Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood would be the first step toward taking action against new homes in Jewish neighborhoods established in the parts of the city annexed after 1967. The Palestinian Authority is hoping that the intervention of the US State Department with Israel to halt a construction project in Jerusalem's Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood would be the first step toward taking action against new homes in Jewish neighborhoods established in the parts of the city annexed after 1967.
According to Israel's Basic Law, the closest thing the country has to a Constitution, the city of Jerusalem is a single municipality under Israeli sovereignty. Obviously the Jewish State can't ban Jews from legally purchasing land somewhere in the country, just because the US President is feeling grumpy that day. So now everyone's in a position - thanks to Obama's subtle diplomacy - where the Palestinians are demanding that Israel violate its most fundamental laws as a precondition for giving away territory.
That confidence isn't coming from nowhere:
In a June 25, 2009 interview with the Jordanian daily Al-Dustour, Palestinian Authority negotiations department head Saeb Ereqat said... that there had been a steady erosion in Israel's position over the years, to the point that it had recently offered the Palestinians 100% of the territory; therefore, the Palestinians had no reason to rush into accepting the Israeli proposals. He stressed that the Right of Return and monetary compensation for the refugees were not mutually exclusive, and that the Palestinians would insist on receiving both.
At least Obama hasn't also personally alienated the Israeli left, guaranteeing that his irrational demands on Israel won't get any support.
References:
* Olmert: Israel not under Syrian nuclear threat [YNet]
* Tough Love Is No Love at All [Rosen]
* Abrams: Of Course There Was A Bush-Sharon Agreement On Settlements [MR]
* Palestinian officials criticize Israel of deflecting attention [Xinhua]
* Abbas says he won't meet Netanyahu [JPost]
* 'No difference to U.S. between outpost, East Jerusalem construction' [Ha'aretz]
* 'Ma'aleh Adumim, Gilo are no different' [JPost]
* Saeb Ereqat: Over the Years, Israel Has Gradually Withdrawn from Its Positions; Therefore, We Have No Reason to Hurry [MEMRI]
* Obama Alienates The Israeli Left: "He Has Spoken About Us But Not To Us" [MR]
Previously:
* Pro-Obama Jewish Groups: The Pre-1967 Arab Stranglehold On Israel Was "Pretty Wonderful"
* Israeli Officials: Hey, Do You Think That Maybe Obama's Going To Detonate The US-Israel Relationship?
* Obama Complains: It's A Media-Fueled "Misperception" That I'm Trying To Detonate The US-Israel Relationship
