Ken Berwitz
Here are the first few paragraphs of Jeffrey Goldberg\’s article for atlanticmonthly.com, titled “The Crisis in U.S.-Israel Relations Is Officially Here”. In reading it, please note that Mr. Goldberg is no fan of Netanyahu\’s, and has never had any problem criticizing Israel:
Theother day I was talking to a senior Obama administration officialabout the foreign leader who seems to frustrate the White House andthe State Department the most. “The thing about Bibi is, he\’s achickenshit,” this official said, referring to the Israeli primeminister, Benjamin Netanyahu, by his nickname.
Thiscomment is representative of the gloves-off manner in which Americanand Israeli officials now talk about each other behind closed doors,and is yet another sign that relations between the Obama andNetanyahu governments have moved toward a full-blown crisis. Therelationship between these two administrations- dual guarantors ofthe putatively “unbreakable” bond between the U.S. and Israel-isnow the worst it\’s ever been, and it stands to get significantlyworse after the November midterm elections. By next year, the Obamaadministration may actually withdraw diplomatic cover for Israel atthe United Nations, but even before that, both sides are expecting ashowdown over Iran, should an agreement be reached about the futureof its nuclear program.
Thefault for this breakdown in relations can be assigned in good part tothe junior partner in the relationship, Netanyahu, and in particular,to the behavior of his cabinet. Netanyahu has told several peopleI\’ve spoken to in recent days that he has “written off” theObama administration, and plans to speak directly to Congress and tothe American people should an Iran nuclear deal be reached. For theirpart, Obama administration officials express, in the words of oneofficial, a “red-hot anger” at Netanyahu for pursuing settlementpolicies on the West Bank, and building policies in Jerusalem, thatthey believe have fatally undermined Secretary of State John Kerry\’speace process.
Overthe years, Obama administration officials have described Netanyahu tome as recalcitrant, myopic, reactionary, obtuse, blustering, pompous,and “Aspergery.” (These are verbatim descriptions; I keep arunning list.) But I had not previously heard Netanyahudescribed as a “chickenshit.” I thought I appreciated theimplication of this description, but it turns out I didn\’t have afull understanding. From time to time, current and formeradministration officials have described Netanyahu as a nationalleader who acts as though he is mayor of Jerusalem, which is to say,a no-vision small-timer who worries mainly about pleasing the hardestcore of his political constituency. (President Obama, in interviewswith me, has alluded to Netanyahu\’s lack of political courage.)
“Thegood thing about Netanyahu is that he\’s scared to launch wars,”the official said, expanding the definition of what a chickenshitIsraeli prime minister looks like. “The bad thing about him is thathe won\’t do anything to reach an accommodation with thePalestinians or with the Sunni Arab states. The only thing he\’sinterested in is protecting himself from political defeat. He\’s not[Yitzhak] Rabin, he\’s not [Ariel] Sharon, he\’s certainly no[Menachem] Begin. He\’s got no guts.”
It\’s hard to know where to begin.
Maybe the best place is to note that a senior administration official calling the Prime Minister of one of our most loyal allies chickenshit and gutless is a testament to just how antagonistic Obama & Co. are to Israel.
Not that we needed the reminder:
-When Obama first became President, he went on a tour of Arab/Islamic countries, including Israel\’s next-door neighbor Egypt, in which he apologized for the USA\’s actions and promised that there would be better relations with the Islamic world. But he did not bother to visit Israel;
-When Prime Minister Netanyahu came to the USA to meet with President Obama, he was put in a room to cool his heels, while Obama had dinner with his family. No explanation, no warning, just Netanyahu sitting there like some pathetic supplicant until King Barack decided he would deign to see him.
Call me a pessimist, but I can\’t help thinking that this kind of behavior might be a tipoff to the “regard” Barack Obama has for Israel and Netanyahu.
Then there is Iran\’s nuclear program. President Obama is happy to deal with, negotiate with and otherwise appease the Iranian leadership – which, apart from lying about its nuclear progress every step of the way, has stated, in so many words, that it intends to “wipe Israel off the map”. Can anyone in the Obama administration seriously wonder why Israel would have a problem with that?
And what about the settlements? Obama has a problem with them….but has never demanded that hamas or fatah (one and the same, since they are now officially in a “unity government”) renounce its charter, which specifically calls for the obliteration of Israel, the death of all Jews – not just in Israel, but everywhere else – and rejects all peace settlements as a religious blasphemy. Let\’s see: expanding settlements or genocide…genocide or expanding settlements….which do you think is more significant? Evidently Mr. Obama thinks it is the settlements.
President Obama “alluding to Netanyahu\’s lack of political courage”? From a man who calls terrorism “man-made disasters” and “workplace violence”? Who called bombing Libya “kinetic military action”? It would be laughable if it weren\’t so pathetic.
If you want a more graphic illustration of who is calling Benjamin Netanyalu out on lack of courage, this picture of the two men in their younger years, which I pulled from John Hinderaker\’s latest piece at powerlineblog.com might be instructive:
But the capper is that Israel “won\’t do anything to reach an accommodation with the Palestinians”. Nah, all Israel has done is hand them Gaza in its entirety, most of Judea and Samaria (the west bank), and make one peace proposal after another, all of which have been rejected by Palestinian Arabs….who, again, have a charter in place that tells Obama & Co. in so many words that they will never accept any such proposal no matter how accommodating it is.
Let me end with a question: in almost 6 years, what has Barack Obama and his administration done more prolifically? Provide cover for Islam, or attack Israel?
Answer that, and you\’ll understand where the problem really is.
