The read-out on the meetings on Sunday and Monday between U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu contained few surprises. Despite the tragic murders of Israelis leaving a synagogue on Friday night--which poignantly occurred on International Holocaust Remembrance Day--and which followed the previous day’s Israeli raid on a reported Islamic Jihad terrorist cell in Jenin, the U.S. clearly wants Israel and the Palestinians to continue its joint security cooperation.
Blinken acknowledged the tragic events that occurred and offered the Biden Administration’s deepest condolences. In light of this outrage, Blinken reiterated the Biden Administration’s commitment to a two-State solution for the Palestinian conflict as the only way to reduce the tension. Netanyahu, rather than respond on point to Blinken, sought to refocus Washington to prioritize not permitting Iran to achieve nuclear capability.
The one thing the two men expressed mutual agreement on was expanding the Abraham Accords. Both parties are interested in finding a way to bring Saudi Arabia into the Accords, but they differ on how far they are willing to go to achieve that end. Certainly, the violent outbreaks over the weekend only serve to increase Saudi resistance to joining the Accords. Israel’s continued willingness to lead the region’s potential fight with Iran has helped improve Bibi’s stock in the eyes of the Saudis. While the U.S. as well continues to seek improved relations with the Saudis, it is less willing to concede the possibility of a future round of negotiations with Iran. In addition, the price of petroleum as well as human rights issues continue to constrain U.S. concessions to the Saudi entry into the Abraham Accords.
In a similar way Washington and Jerusalem continue to differ on how far Israel ought to extend its assistance to Ukraine. Netanyahu continues to strongly oppose providing Ukraine with anything other than humanitarian assistance. Israel argues that they need to rely on continued Russian efforts to withhold Syrian/Iranian incursions into Israel or challenging continuing Israeli efforts to sabotage Iranian weapons development.
Underlying this straight-forward, predictable love-in, there undoubtedly were many sensitive differences between the U.S, and Israel. That portion of their meetings probably was much more contentious.
Whatever might be their differences, Blinken impressed on Netanyahu two important political factors. First, President Biden had experienced Netanyahu’s end-run around President Obama and the Congressional Democrats in March 2015 when he sought to cajole the U.S. to oppose the Iran deal. Blinken endeavored to gain some type of assurance from Bibi that he would deal with any differences with respect to Iran through diplomatic and personal channels and not by grandstanding. To what extent Netanyahu acquiesced to Blinken is unclear, but the U.S. does hold a potential carrot for the Israelis; to try to move the Saudi’s closer to joining the Abraham Accords.
Second, Blinken, while recognizing the democratic will of the Israeli people to support a far-right, extremist government, undoubtedly expressed the Biden Administration’s concern about the proposed judicial reforms that have so far been presented by the new Government; specifically, how they test America’s view of Israeli democracy. While Blinken avoided the matter of Netanyahu’s personal legal problems, he certainly conveyed U.S. concern that any judicial “reforms” affirm Israel’s democratic tradition and not undermine it. Blinken expressed his worry for the future role of the Israeli Supreme Court as well as the entire judicial process, something that has been cited by many Members of Congress including two leading Jewish Members. In the eyes of many in Washington, it is the shared democratic values that have kept the U.S.-Israel relationship strong. Blinken—as did many American legal scholars, Jewish leaders, and international friends of Israel—voiced very serious concerns that many of the proposed judicial reforms undermine the historically mutual set of shared democratic values.
Finally, Blinken found himself in the middle of what appears to be an escalation in fighting between Israelis and Palestinians. For Blinken, his effort to tone down the possible direction of the new Israeli Government will be undermined if Palestinian attacks against Israelis and violent, settler responses against Palestinians persist or intensify. Any serious U.S. efforts to moderate the directions predicted for the new extremist right-wing Israeli Government will be ineffective if a serious military confrontation develops.
----------
Bibi’s Dilemma
For Prime Minister Netanyahu the challenge beyond the serious national security issues, the geopolitical challenges, and the domestic institutional changes, will be managing the extreme demands that his coalition partners may insist upon. It will not be a problem of money or finance but whether the partners want to remain in power or are prepared to risk blowing up the Government and, conceivably, chance a new election.
Comments