The left went to the beach

[shira]

A huge omission lies in the American demand that Israel freeze construction in the settlements. President Barack Obama and his aides failed to stir an internal Israeli debate on the settlements and did not pose a political or public challenge to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu regarding his insistence that "natural growth" be allowed beyond the Green Line.

A Haaretz-Dialog poll published last Friday shows that the public is divided over what is best: construction in the territories or friendship with Obama. Nonetheless, no political force in Israel stood up to Netanyahu and called on him to "say yes to Obama - freeze the settlements." Not Tzipi Livni and Kadima, who missed an opportunity to challenge the prime minister because of the rift with the United States. Not Yuli Tamir and the other Labor rebels, who could have depicted Defense Minister Ehud Barak as a collaborator with the settlers. Even Meretz, which is trying to rehabilitate itself, did not take up the flag of struggle that Obama put out there.

During deliberations in the Knesset a week ago, some opposition MKs attacked Netanyahu for ruining our ties with the United States. But none of them, not even the Arab MKs, called on him to accept Obama's demand.

The left's silence is amazing if we recall the previous crisis in relations with the United States, during the era of George H.W. Bush. At that time Laborites demanded that prime minister Yitzhak Shamir "say yes to Baker," and when he refused, they disbanded the unity government. Two years later the left supported America when it conditioned loan guarantees to Israel on freezing settlements. This time, nothing. It's as if the left is saying: Let Obama and Bibi fight it out - we're going to the beach. It's summertime.

What happened?

more...
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1098630.html

[bemildred]

1. That's the problem with be a dependant, your outcomes depend on other peoples interests. nt

[shira]

2. from Barry Rubin, regarding this OP

Why Israel's Left Doesn't Support Obama or a Settlement Construction Freeze

By Barry Rubin

Aluf Benn, possibly Israel's smartest journalist, makes a fascinating point about the construction on settlement freeze issue: why is Israel's left so indifferent to it? In the past, the left (which can mean, say, Labor party through Peace Now) has eagerly rallied to U.S. efforts to press Israel for concessions, especially on the territories. Not this time, even though the concession being sought is smaller than many in the past.

Benn attributes a lot of this to Obama's failure to sell his program. It is true that he has made no effort to appeal to Israelis on it but I think there's another explanation. The truth is that in the past a lot of Israelis on the left were persuaded that there was a real chance for peace and that by proving its willingness to leave the territories, Israel could persuade the Palestinians to make a deal.

Hardly anyone believes that today in Israel. People are fed up with the Palestinian leadership's bad faith and failure to deliver on commitments. They know that Hamas controls the Gaza Strip and has a big support base on the West Bank. They have no illusions about the Palestinian Authority leadership, which makes clear that its entire program is to have others pressure Israel into giving it everything it wants.

So the left's response would go something like this: We would be willing to dismantle all Jewish settlements in favor of a real and lasting peace. But do you really think freezing building on settlements will contribute to this goal? That's nonsense.

There's a secondary factor as well. Many Israelis on the moderate left--which are the overwhelming majority of those in the "left" category--support a two-state solution with some border shifts. In this concept, which is what Labor party leader and then prime minister Ehud Barak took to Camp David in 2000, Israel would retain some small areas with high Jewish (settlement) populations like Maale Adumim and Gush Etzion.

This concept was called the idea of the "settlement blocs." Israel believed that the last two U.S. presidents accepted this idea and thus agreed that Israel could continue building in these specific places. The Obama administration says that never happened.

So many Israelis on the left not only doubt the prospect of peace and blame the Palestinians for the situation and also favor the settlement blocs approach and are also made very nervous about a U.S. government that forgets past pledges to Israel and doubt Obama's willingness to be tough in opposing Iranian nuclear weapons.

That's why there's no pro-Obama bloc in Israel today, not even on the left.

http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2009/07/why-israels-left-doesnt-support-obama.html

[shira]

3. from Shmuel Rosner, related to these articles

Does Obama understand Israeli politics?
Posted by SHMUEL ROSNER


Last week, an American official told me that I was way over the line when I wrote that the Obama administration "was not mistaken, it was lying without even blinking". My point was: I do not believe the administration when it comes to "not knowing" about Israel's understandings with President Bush on settlements. Ignoring previous understandings, claiming that the new administration has no obligation to keep these understandings alive, believing that the understandings were unhelpful - this is all acceptable. But saying that the Obama team isn't familiar with the understandings - is, well, hard to believe.

Nevertheless, last weekend I was somewhat apologetic when it comes to the use of the word "lie". It was a lawyerly way of getting rid of the understandings, I said. I still do not like it, I still find it problematic, but I don't want the use of harsh language to become the focus of my argument. Of course, this didn't prevent me from smiling as I was reading my friend Aluf's article this morning:

Obama did not try to communicate with the Israeli public and convince them that freezing settlements will be an important and positive step to contribute to peace and a better future. Obama addressed the Arabs and Muslims, but not the Israelis. His neglect increased concerns among Israelis that they do not have a friend in the White House. When the president is "Hussein," he is perceived as being pro-Arab and picking on Netanyahu. The administration's pathetic attempt to deny the existence of understandings with Israel on construction in the settlements only bolstered this impression. It was possible to blame Israel for violating its promises, or to say that the policy had changed and to explain why, but not to lie.

Bottom line: We have to assume one of two things.

1. The Obama administration doesn't understand Israeli politics, and doesn't recognize that its public policies - while possibly helpful with the Arab world - can hardly make Israelis feel secure and ready to cooperate with the President, no matter how often he says that his commitment to Israel's security is unshakable.


2. The Obama administration doesn't care about Israeli politics and Israeli public opinion, and is ready to sacrifice the good will of Israelis in exchange for (presumed) better relations with the Arab world.

In either case - as I've demonstrated a couple of days ago - the administration should take into account that it doesn't have any track record with which to calm Israelis. It's true that the Israeli public wasn't happy with PM Netanyahu's tendency to quarrel with the Clinton administration in the mid 1990's. But this was a different situation: by the time Netanyahu was elected, Clinton was already a "great friend", and most Israeli recognized that his intentions (even when they didn't like some of his actions) were good. Another difference: In the Nineties a significant number of Israelis still believed that peace with Palestinians was possible. They could see why some American pressure might be helpful in the long run.

For Obama, life with Israelis is more complicated. He started pushing immediately, without gaining the confidence of Israelis first. And he is pushing even though it is clear to the vast majority of Israelis that freezing the settlements will not bring about peace or security.

That's why one doesn't see many Israelis supporting Obama's attempt to freeze the settlements. That's why no major political party in Israel can afford to be identified with the Obama way. It will be politically damaging.

Does this need fixing? Maybe yes, maybe not. Depends on ones answer to the question of "doesn't understand" and "doesn't care".

http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/rosner/entry/does_obama_understand_israeli_politics

[LeftishBrit]

4. I would not consider Rosner as an authority on why the 'left' does anything.

I know less about Barry Rubin, but, given that he has very recently published in 'The American Thinker', I think he may not be a spokesperson for the left (American or Israeli) either.

Yes, Hamas has done a lot to help marginalize the Israeli left - just as the Israeli Right have done a lot to help marginalize the Palestinian moderates. But I suspect that these particular writers would be anti-Obama and anti-left anyway.

[shira]

5. just providing context on the state of Israel's left, that's all

compared to the left internationally who doesn't live there and doesn't have firsthand knowledge about existential threats.

[azurnoir]

6. Your right

the international left is not facing the prospect of 300.000 or so new neighbors with the associated drain on internal Israeli resources