May 10, 2009
What to look for
Like I did the other day, Jennifer Rubin wonders about the administration's welcome realism about Syria contrasted with its apparent disregard for Israel. Regarding Israel she writes:
There are, it seems, two possible ways to read this. The first is that we may be seeing the lack of co-ordination and gaffe-proclivity that has popped up on everything from the Russian reset button to the chintzy gifts for Gordon Brown. The new U.S. team simply hasn't gotten its act together and has committed a series of oversights.The alternative, more troubling explanation is that the U.S. is already signaling a less warm relationship with Israel in an effort to cozy up to the Arab states and begin a process of cajoling and pressuring Israel to offer up concessions. If Netanyahu is to be given an ultimatum on settlements, Israel will have the unlucky distinction as the only country exempt from the "listen, don't dictate" Obama diplomacy. Perhaps if Israeli leaders threaten or insult the president rather than sing his praises in public they might get the kid glove treatment currently reserved for the likes of Iran and China.
We will have to see. But the "incompetent" explanation does not engender confidence and the fact that the "chilling" explanation seems plausible should worry those who believe that a rift in the U.S.-Israeli relationship benefits neither country.
There is, I think, a third explanation. That is that the diplomatic differences between the United States and Israel have largely been blown out of proportion. There are those who wish to portray Netanyahu as a an extreme right winger. And there are those (like me) who feel that President Obama is unsympathetic to Israel. Each group wishes to play up differences which may or may not have been manifest yet. While I think that the signs certainly point to the latter possibility, it's also possible that we won't know anything until President Obama and PM Netanyahu meet next week. I still think it's possible that there will be less friction at that meeting than advertised.
The most important thing to look out for will be whether there will be anonymous "senior administration officials" talking to reporters and denigrating Netanyahu. If that happens we're likely to see a replay of Netanyahu's first term with the administration seeking to undercut him at every opportunity.
Crossposted on Yourish.
Posted by SoccerDad at May 10, 2009 6:51 AM
Hamas Economic Crisis Reveals Gaza As A Just Terrorist Group Surrounded By Human Shields
Gaza: you can never have too many snickers bars
Peter's perverse principle
Fortunately they weren't violent tea party types
It Takes Burning Down A Summer Camp For UNRWA To Notice
What's the difference between "disgraced" and a "higher ethical standard?"
The messaging or the strategy
The first prejudice
A treasure trove of terror
What if obamacare applied to state lotteries?
"If Netanyahu is to be given an ultimatum on settlements, Israel will have the unlucky distinction as the only country exempt from the "listen, don't dictate" Obama diplomacy".
...............................................
Dictating to Israel is an approach without any risks. What risks come with bossing around a tiny country of six million Jews with no oil. That is far safer than standing up to a billion violent crazed muslims.
Then, I think, you will be happy to read this (another Rubin, by the way):
http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2009/05/mister-netanyahu-goes-to-washington.html
Me, I am a pessimist, you know...
Posted by: SnoopyTheGoon at May 10, 2009 1:26 PMYeah I read that glossy Rubin take this morning..
This theory does not explain the total lack of coordination with Israel until now, nor does it explain how the entire national security apparatus of the USA, the State Dept, or the White House all of which have been active across the entire region have seemingly ignored Israel's existence up until now. You have to be literally BLIND to not see how Blair, Obama, the EU, are looking to ensnare Israel with this quid pro quo. It was the 1st thing out of Clinton's mouth, Rahm's mouth, Blair's mouth..
It is very simple, Axelrod, Jones, Power, S-Rice, and the entire crew are not friends of Israel, and I don't buy the Rahm token nomination either. He's there to pitbull Obama's opponents, period. The only reason Rubin hasn't seen more anti Israel intensity yet is because of small pullbacks. Pullback from the hill over Durban II, where rice was ready to play ball with the degenerates of the planet, pullbacks on Syria where that sanction executive order was originally put in place by lawmaker pressure, and nixing them without a single change in Syrian behavior would have raised hell, pullbacks from Clinton herself with what little sway she has after facing the Foreign Relations & other committees the past 3 weeks - I watched those sessions, even democrats have had bitting questions on 'engagement with dictators strategy'
SD - you are looking for the signs, you won't see Netanyahu storm out of the Oval Office, but even our President Peres, the biggest dove in Israel was tense, terse and nearly shunned by this WH, he was far from smiling when he left. What are we expecting, nuclear launch against Israel from the USA? - I mean come on.. talk about seeing the silver lining.
Sorry about length.. but which part of dying for concessions & dying to appease is not blatantly clear from this WH!?!?!?! and who on earth doesn't know where they want the cookies from?
Posted by: saus at May 10, 2009 2:24 PM