Stony Brook Film Festival
view counter
U.S. Pulls The Plug
Tue, 12/07/2010

It’s hardly surprising that U.S. efforts to coax Israel into extending its West Bank settlement freeze seem to have derailed. What was unclear from the initial reports: does the Obama administration have a Plan B, or does this represent the effective end of its efforts to find a route to peace for Israel and the Palestinians?

From the beginning, it never made much sense to us to invest U.S. prestige in an unbecoming effort to lure Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu back to the peace table with a rich package of incentives that included F-35 warplanes.

It was hard for us to picture how a non-renewable, 90-day extension of the freeze would materially change an environment in which neither Israel nor the Palestinians seemed particularly anxious to renew their troubled talks.

While Netanyahu at least offered verbal support for U.S. efforts to revive direct negotiations, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas signaled complete indifference — suggesting that once again, he hoped U.S. negotiators would deliver to him a deal for Palestinian statehood that he is reluctant to seek through direct negotiations.

We await details about exactly what the administrations decision means. But we can’t help but be troubled by its broader implications, including appearing to put the onus on Israel when in fact it was Washington’s poor choice to make settlements the centerpiece of its peace strategy that created the problem in the first place.

The administration stumbled badly with that initial demand for a complete Israeli settlement freeze, while demanding little, if anything from the Palestinians. President Barack Obama failed to understand how his active outreach to the Islamic world and seeming indifference to public opinion in an understandably sensitive Israel was playing in the Jewish state. The results were perfectly predictable: plunging support for his leadership and for the kind of peace process he has advocated.

Israelis have proven their willingness to take risks for peace, but not when the Palestinians won’t even come to the table.

Now there’s the reported end of the administration’s misguided effort to win a temporary extension in the settlement freeze that few analysts believed had a chance of promoting serious negotiations. And there’s the image of what The New York Times called “three weeks of fruitless haggling” over the incentives package — hardly the stuff of strong international leadership.

Like most observers who care about peace in the troubled region, we await a fuller explanation about this week’s events and what comes next. But there are too many signs that this is just the latest in a series of foreign policy gaffes that call into question the competence of an administration that has already lost the trust of populations across the Middle East and which seems to be losing the trust of the American people, as well.

Get The Jewish Week Newsletter

Comment Guidelines

The Jewish Week feels comments create a valuable conversation and wants to feature your thoughts on our website. To make everyone feel welcome, we won't publish comments that are profane, irrelevant, promotional or make personal attacks.

Comments

I agree that it made no sense to offer Israel an incentive package of advanced warplanes to bring them to the negotiating table, but I don't agree that asking them to freeze settlements was inappropriate, or that the Palestinians were not asked to do anything. The Administration was asking the Palestinians to stop terrorism, and, indeed, they have apparently tried to do so and have achieved some success. Israel was not asked to do anything that could have adversely affected the country's security. Indeed, a halt to settlement construction would contribute to Israel's security by enabling them, under the cover of peace negotiations, to stop a practice that amounted to digging a deeper and deeper hole. Israel has now missed that opportunity, but any implication that the Administration offer, while, perhaps, not politically astute, was one-sided or inappropriate, misses the point of what they were trying to achieve.
That's a very sensible piece of analysis. Though we don't know what Obama's next step will be, he may well try an imposed solution - as suggested in American Thinker's blog http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/12/will_obama_impose_a_solution_o.html

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.