Israel under veiled US threat of diplomatic isolation DEBKAfile Special Report March 24, 2010
The high-stakes conversations Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu held in Washington with President Barack Obama and secretary of state Hillary Clinton on March 23-24 only deepened the crisis marring relations between the two governments, DEBKAfile's Washington sources report.
Netanyahu, defense minister Ehud Barak and their aides, received a strong impression that the White House's hand was behind certain European steps to drive Israeli into a corner on the points at issue. For example, even if the British government needed no encouragement to pick a fight with Israel over an unproven link with the forged passports used by the Dubai killers, Washington knew about the British plan to expel an Israeli diplomat. Its silence was taken by London as a go-ahead and a signal to the Netanyahu government that punishment could be coming from Washington too and that Israel could pay for defying the Obama administration with broad international isolation. France is also considering lining up behind this campaign.
President Obama showed his displeasure with the Israeli government's failure to cave in to his demands - especially after Netanyahu's declaration that Jerusalem is no settlement but "our capital" to the AIPAC conference Monday - by ordering all the Israeli prime minister's meetings in Washington to take place without statements, news coverage or the cameras which normally record smiles and handshakes between friendly leaders.
The warm public bipartisan welcome he received on Capital Hill was followed by the cold, peremptory shower given him at the White House.
"We in Congress stand by Israel," the Democrat leader of the House, Nancy Pelosi, said. "In Congress we speak with one voice on the subject of Israel."
"We have no stronger ally anywhere in the world than Israel," said the House Republican leader, John Boehner. "We all know we're in a difficult moment."
At their first 90-minute encounter, the president made clear what he expected the Israeli prime minister to do on Jerusalem, West Bank settlements and Iran and where he drew the line. Every effort by Netanyahu and, behind the scenes, Barak and their advisers, to ease the pressure fell on deaf ears.
As the tension climbed in the Oval Office, Netanyahu asked to consult privately with his staff and after an hour, asked to see Obama again. A second 35-minute conversation followed, after which the Israeli leader left without achieving any breakthrough on their differences.
DEBKAfile's Middle East sources report that this latest turn of events in US-Israeli relations makes naught of American leaders' constant affirmations of commitment to Israel's security. Iran, Syria, Hizballah, Hamas and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas are acutely sensitive to the slightest crack in American support for Israel and ready with tactics for widening the rift. They will now drive hard to separate the Obama administration from America's historic military backing for the Jewish state.
Debka also reports: Netanyahu flies home amid disagreement with Obama on key issues
US president Barack Obama kept on turning the screw on Israeli minister Binyamin Netanyahu Wednesday, March 24, after their harsh conversation in the White House Tuesday: Netanyahu was told bluntly to issue a White House-dictated public pledge before leaving Washington for home to eschew further construction in East Jerusalem, or else face a US presidential notice condemning Israel and holding its government responsible for the failure to restart indirect Israel-Palestinian talks.
Reporting this, DEBKAfile's Washington sources add that Netanyahu's public renunciation of Jerusalem construction was required to include also the large Jewish suburbs of the city and remain in force for the duration of negotiations. He must also pledge further concessions to the Palestinians.
As part of the ultimatum, the US president warned the Israeli prime minister that he also intended formulating in detail for the first time the settlement the US government sought for solving the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.
Netanyahu flew out of Wednesday night without reaching common ground with the president on the key points at issue. He and defense minister Ehud Barak spent their last hours in the US capital working on a statement that might satisfy the White House. Barak worked out of the Israel embassy with the president's special adviser Dennis Ross at the National Security Council's office at the White House. Middle East envoy George Mitchell shuttled between them in an effort to save his mission.
A high-ranking US official categorized the current crisis in US-Israeli relations as the most acute in 54 years, ever since 1956 when President Dwight Eisenhower gave David Ben-Gurion an ultimatum to pull Israeli forces out of Sinai - certainly more serious than the impasse over the Madrid conference between the first President Bush and Yitzhak Shamir in 1992.
A US presidential notice condemning Israel and predetermining the shape of an Israeli-Palestinian settlement would be tantamount to a US diktat and put the lid on negotiations, direct or indirect, because Israel would be dragged to the table in handcuffs to face an Arab partner who would accept nothing less than the terms Washington imposed in advance on Israel.
Such a notice would put a clamp on the close dialogue which has historically characterized US-Israeli ties - to the detriment of Israel's international standing.
The Washington Post laid the blame for the crisis squarely on President Obama, whom it accused of treating Netanyahu "as if he were an unsavory Third World dictator, needed for strategic reasons but conspicuously held at arms length."
The WP went on to say: "Obama picked a fight over something that virtually all Israelis agree on, and before serious discussions have even begun.
"A new administration can be excused for making such a mistake in the treacherous and complex theater of Middle East diplomacy. That’s why Obama was given a pass by many when he made exactly the same mistake last year. The second time around, the president doesn’t look naive. He appears ideological -- and vindictive."
