Cantor Promises to Check Obama on Israel

On Wednesday night, Prime Minister Netanyahu met for an hour with Eric Cantor (R-Va), the incoming House Majority Leader. Ben Smith has all the details here, but the statement issued after the meeting is a doozer and bears highlighting.

"Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the Administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington," the readout continued. "He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other."

Veteran observer of U.S.-Israeli relations Ron Kampeas said he found that statement "an eyebrow-raiser."

"I can't remember an opposition leader telling a foreign leader, in a personal meeting, that he would side, as a policy, with that leader against the president," Kampeas wrote at JTA's blog -- an interpretation which Cantor's office later disputed to Kampeas. (For my part, I detected in Cantor's statement on the meeting an effort as well to be a bit more restrained and statesman-like -- the nod to the United Nations -- than the usual partisan campaign fare of a hardcharging politico now moving into a Congressional majority leadership position that may require more diplomatic guidance than he needed as minority whip.)

Kampeas also characterized the one-on-one meeting between the prime minister and the lawmaker as unusual, adding that he has "it on good authority that as late as last week, Bibi's people were at pains to deny that such a meeting would take place."

The Presidential Trip

Bibi and Barack
Barack Obama in the Levant

Wisely, the US leader has been upbeat about his journey to the east, but has not fuelled expectations. The best politician America has produced in the Television Age is not one to tip his hand.

Having publicly demanded that Israel stop building settlements in the predominantly Palestinian West Bank, the President will also ask Arab nations collectively to recognize Israel's existence.
Tying together all the elements of such a speech is no easy proposition, for his worldwide audience — Muslim and non-Muslim — has multiple competing priorities and concerns.
Consider: Lebanese go to the polls just three days after he speaks, Iranians will be preparing for pivotal elections June 12 and both contests pit moderate parties against radical forces. Afghans and Pakistanis are girding for increased U.S. military and political engagement. [Mc Klatchey]
Palestinians and Israelis have conflicting stakes. In the U.S., Republicans will be looking for any window to paint the Democratic president as anti-American, anti-Israel or soft on terrorism.
"It's a very high bar to clear. The expectations are immense," said Tamara Cofman Wittes, the director of the Middle East Democracy and Development Project at the Washington-based Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy. "No matter how broadly he speaks, what he says will be parsed through the lens of those disagreements."
Obama won't lay out a detailed vision for resolving the Arab-Israeli crisis. "I want to use the occasion to deliver a broader message about how the United States can change for the better its relationship with the Muslim world," the president said Thursday. "That will require, I think, recognition on both the part of the United States as well as many majority Muslim countries about each other, a better sense of understanding, and I think possibilities to achieve common ground."
Obama would like to rally Muslim countries to join in efforts to contain Iran's nuclear program. While many Arab governments also see Iran as a threat, however, the issue divides Muslims, in part because Israel is pressing for military action.

Obama Begins to Be Realistic

Why should Arabs undergo a negotiation process if the President alone can rip concessions from Israel? 74% of Israelis believe that Barack Obama won't gain anything for us. Iran's proxies have attacked us twice in three years. This is why 84% of us believe Iran's nuclear development is unlikely to be peaceful. Turkey and Saudi Arabia agree. Both nations have asked permission to begin nuclear programs. They held still when only Israel had WMD. As Iran approaches nuclear status, they want it too.
When Mr Obama was campaigning, he denounced Bush administration policies. After the Inauguration, we saw Obama carrying on with cosmetic changes to the old policies. Now, we see him shift to a wide range of the Bush agenda. With many of my countrymen, I welcome the awakening of realism in Obama.

Obama has already decided how to deal with Israelis

The President has decided to delay talks about Iran's nukes for two years. This should be enough time for her to develop her own WMD or to buy them. Obama has placed Israeli and Iranian lives in Ahmadinejad's hands. People who enjoy TV accounts of nuclear events will be thrilled.
The President should follow advice to ignore the AIPAC letter. It might offend him. Also, he should ignore the millions of ordinary Israeli and Iranian nationals who don't want to be vaporized. Their deaths might cast a pall on the NBA play-offs.

"Enlightened individuals live in bliss and harmony with all. There is nothing to fear in their minds. There are stories of Yogis who could pet tigers in the jungles of India.
Fear-drenched dualists, at war with the Eternal Enemy, suffer endless daily deaths and agonies, compounded by barbarities perpetrated to try to defeat this enemy, never realizing that this is simply the absurd act of the right hand trying to destroy the left hand, or vice-versa, and wondering why one feels so badly all the time, that is if they recognize their feelings at all. Denial is a big factor in the psychotic mindset.
Where does the Israeli State fall on the scale between enlightened vision and psychotic vision?"
Mac McKinney

The Ways of the Torah are Sweet

After two serious years in Vietnam, the USA went nuts. They were to remain so for forty years. They collapsed on 9/11 into fear and are still mired. Americans sometimes ask me. After 61 years of hostility, seven wars and three Intifadas, how does any Israeli manage a semblance of normal life? The answer is to walk in the ways of the Torah keeping the diversions minimal. I have a picture of my son on the battlefield deeply into his morning prayers.
That's how.

How Old Is Barack Obama? How Old is His Country?

Whatever answers you give, Israel and I are about 5700 years older. Over the years we have walked the walk and thought the thought a full range of human experience. What's more, we could write our history [the Bible] and read it to our children. There is nothing new under the sun. If an upstart poses a problem, there is a scholar who will get the answer to it from an ancient sage on line.
We dealt with Alexander the Great and we will deal with Barack Obama.

Abbass' Waiting Game

Abbass' Waiting Game
Jackson Diehl

Mahmoud Abbas says there is nothing for him to do.
True, the Palestinian president walked into his meeting with Barack Obama yesterday as the pivotal player in any Middle East peace process. If there is to be a deal, Abbas must (1) agree on all the details of a two-state settlement with the new Israeli government of Binyamin Netanyahu, which hasn't yet accepted Palestinian statehood, and (2) somehow overcome the huge split in Palestinian governance between his Fatah movement, which controls the West Bank, and Hamas, which rules Gaza and hasn't yet accepted Israel's right to exist.
Yet on Wednesday afternoon, as he prepared for the White House meeting in a suite at the Ritz-Carlton in Pentagon City, Abbas insisted that his only role was to wait. He will wait for Hamas to capitulate to his demand that any Palestinian unity government recognize Israel and swear off violence. And he will wait for the Obama administration to force a recalcitrant Netanyahu to freeze Israeli settlement construction and publicly accept the two-state formula.
Until Israel meets his demands, the Palestinian president says, he will refuse to begin negotiations. He won't even agree to help Obama's envoy, George J. Mitchell, persuade Arab states to take small confidence-building measures. "We can't talk to the Arabs until Israel agrees to freeze settlements and recognize the two-state solution," he insisted in an interview. "Until then we can't talk to anyone."
For veterans of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, Abbas's bargaining position will be bone-wearyingly familiar: Both sides invariably begin by arguing that they cannot act until the other side offers far-reaching concessions. Netanyahu suggested during his own visit to Washington last week that the Palestinians should start by recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, though he didn't make it a precondition for meeting with Abbas.
What's interesting about Abbas's hardline position, however, is what it says about the message that Obama's first Middle East steps have sent to Palestinians and Arab governments. From its first days the Bush administration made it clear that the onus for change in the Middle East was on the Palestinians: Until they put an end to terrorism, established a democratic government and accepted the basic parameters for a settlement, the United States was not going to expect major concessions from Israel.
Obama, in contrast, has repeatedly and publicly stressed the need for a West Bank settlement freeze, with no exceptions. In so doing he has shifted the focus to Israel. He has revived a long-dormant Palestinian fantasy: that the United States will simply force Israel to make critical concessions, whether or not its democratic government agrees, while Arabs passively watch and applaud. "The Americans are the leaders of the world," Abbas told me and Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt. "They can use their weight with anyone around the world. Two years ago they used their weight on us. Now they should tell the Israelis, 'You have to comply with the conditions.' "
It's true, of course, that if Obama is to broker a Middle East settlement he will have to overcome the recalcitrance of Netanyahu and his Likud party, which has not yet reconciled itself to the idea that Israel will have to give up most of the West Bank and evacuate tens of thousands of settlers. But Palestinians remain a long way from swallowing reality as well. Setting aside Hamas and its insistence that Israel must be liquidated, Abbas -- usually described as the most moderate of Palestinian leaders -- last year helped doom Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, by rejecting a generous outline for Palestinian statehood.
In our meeting Wednesday, Abbas acknowledged that Olmert had shown him a map proposing a Palestinian state on 97 percent of the West Bank -- though he complained that the Israeli leader refused to give him a copy of the plan. He confirmed that Olmert "accepted the principle" of the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees -- something no previous Israeli prime minister had done -- and offered to resettle thousands in Israel. In all, Olmert's peace offer was more generous to the Palestinians than either that of Bush or Bill Clinton; it's almost impossible to imagine Obama, or any Israeli government, going further.
Abbas turned it down. "The gaps were wide," he said.
Abbas and his team fully expect that Netanyahu will never agree to the full settlement freeze -- if he did, his center-right coalition would almost certainly collapse. So they plan to sit back and watch while U.S. pressure slowly squeezes the Israeli prime minister from office. "It will take a couple of years," one official breezily predicted. Abbas rejects the notion that he should make any comparable concession -- such as recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, which would imply renunciation of any large-scale resettlement of refugees.
Instead, he says, he will remain passive. "I will wait for Hamas to accept international commitments. I will wait for Israel to freeze settlements," he said. "Until then, in the West Bank we have a good reality . . . the people are living a normal life." In the Obama administration, so far, it's easy being Palestinian.