Benjamin Netanyahu will avoid a confrontation with the Biden administration over settlements by going slow on further colonization of the West Bank, at first. But if Biden has any illusion about reentering the Iran deal, Netanyahu “is going to have to draw a line in the sand,” a leading Israel lobbyist predicted today.
David Harris of the American Jewish Committee, who is close to Netanyahu, said on an AJC webinar that Netanyahu knows “very well” the people being mentioned for Biden foreign policy positions, chiefly Obama retreads. And while Netanyahu will make a “gesture” toward the Biden team on settlements, he won’t on Iran.
This is just my guess, but Prime Minister Netanyahu knows very well that if he moves early on settlements in the Biden administration, it’s a red flag, and it’s going to set off voices in the White House, particularly among Democrats in Congress, and it’s going to force a confrontation.
So the Prime Minister has to ask himself, Should I do it? Is there a compelling enough reason to do it and incur the price? Or maybe this is something where… I can let this pass for now. It’s not that important in any case, I’m moving ahead with the UAE and Bahrain and Sudan, they too would get upset. So I’m going to hold back. I think that’s very possible.
On the other hand, the Prime Minister will likely say on the issue of Iran, for me it’s non negotiable. Because for me, it’s an existential question for Israel and the region. ‘I would do my best to work with the Biden administration, I’m going to see how much they have changed in their thinking, having been out of office for the last four years and having witnessed the last five years of the history of the Iran nuclear deal. If I find that they’ve changed and they’re open to new thinking, I’m plunging right in and engaging. If I find that they are back to their original thinking, nothing has changed, no influence of recent events on their thinking about the deal– then I’m going to have to draw a line in the sand.
Harris’s claim about the “history” of the last five years of the deal is merely a fig leaf for Israel’s and the AJC’s devout opposition to the deal, then and now. Netanyahu went so far as to defy the Obama administration by giving a speech against the deal to Congress in early 2015. Netanyahu’s opposition caused Obama to have to pull out all the stops in selling the deal. At one point he said it would be “an abrogation” of his constitutional duty if he stood with Israel and not with Americans’ interest in making the deal.
Harris is also signaling that the conservative Israel lobby groups will oppose Biden’s return to the deal. Some liberal Israel lobby groups support the deal, notably J Street and Americans Peace Now, and they will attempt to give Biden political cover to revive the deal. But we could see a political battle akin to Obama’s of 2015.
So… Netanyahu’s choices are not so interesting as Biden’s. Does he have the gumption?
We can draw many lines in the sand too, if we really wanted to tell Israel to go jump in the Dead sea.
How about telling them to stop interfering in our foreign policies, or else we will stop those billions dollars in aid from going there? We could also stop protecting them at the UN, and most importantly stop the flow of US weapons from going into their hands. Weapons that are used to kill unarmed civilians.
The question is will the US find the courage to draw those lines, or will those who serve the zionists in Congress fear Bibi’s wrath. Israel has been able to perpetrate the most despicable human rights abuses and crimes, a brutal occupation, and land grabs, because of the US aid, weapons, and support, all we have to do is stop it immediately. This is a good example of grabbing the tiger by it’s tail unable to let go. We are in a parasitic relationship with Israel, and only a leader with spine made out of steel, and a whole lot of integrity and courage, will cut it all out. Unfortunately there are none to be seen.
For the record:
“…in May 2003, a conference of the member states’ foreign ministers [of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation] in Tehran ‘reaffirmed its support to, & adoption of, the 2002 Beirut Arab Peace Initiative for resolving the issue of Palestine & the Middle-East.’ Indeed, an information leaflet about the peace initiative posted on the Arab League’s official website shows the flags of all countries that endorse the proposal, including those of Libya, Syria — & Iran.” (“Why is Israel so afraid of the Arab Peace Initiative?, by Raphael Ahren, The Times of Israel, 18 June 2013.)
The Beirut Arab Summit Initiative was also “formally accepted by the [then] ‘supreme leader’ of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei. [Furthermore, Sheikh] Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah made it clear that Hezbollah would not disrupt such an agreement if it is accepted by Palestinians & Hamas has repeatedly indicated its willingness to negotiate in these terms.” (“On the US-Israeli Invasion of Lebanon” by Professor Noam Chomsky, Znet, August 23, 2006)
Notably, the Beirut Arab Summit Initiative has also been adopted by the Organization of Islamic States which includes Iran. (Akiva Eldar, “What will happen if Israel ‘defeats’ Obama?” – Ha’aretz, 1 June 2009)
The Beirut Arab Summit Initiative (28 March 2002) was presented to Israel in April, 2002. Accepted wholeheartedly by the Palestinians, the Arab League proposals call for a formal peace treaty & normalization of relations, including full recognition of Israel as a sovereign state, exchange of ambassadors, trade agreements, tourism, cultural exchanges, etc., if Israel complies with mandatory international law, e.g., U.N. Security Resolution 242, the U.N. Charter & international humanitarian law (e.g., the Fourth Geneva Convention) by withdrawing to the borders of 4 June 1967.
Fully aware of Israel’s demographic concerns, the Beirut Arab Summit Initiative does not call for the return of all Palestinian refugees of the 1948 conflict to their homes in Israel. Instead, in accordance with policy first enunciated by President Arafat prior to & during Camp David 2000, Article II of Paragraph 2 “calls upon Israel to affirm” that it agrees to pursue the “[a]chievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.”
Excuse me, Netanyahu is going to draw a line in the sand? This is the tail wagging the dog. Or maybe I’m mistaken as to the identities of the dog and the tail.
“At one point he said it would be “an abrogation” of his constitutional duty if he stood with Israel and not with Americans’ interest in making the deal”
Meanwhile an interesting Iranian perspective, unsparing in its criticism of the Iranian government.
A Call for Solidarity: Working-Class Struggles in Iran and the United StatesBy : Alborz Ghandehari
“International solidarity is a necessity. Our fates are interlinked in a global capitalist system. US and Iranian super rich sectors attained their wealth at the expense of the majority of people in both countries, despite the fact that Iranian and US capitalists often compete in the global order. It was with this understanding that Iranian students during the November 2019 revolt expressed common cause with simultaneous uprisings in France, Lebanon, Iraq, and Chile against “repression and plunder [of wealth]” worldwide. It was in this spirit that eighty workers’ organizations, across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas, published a statement in August standing behind striking Iranian workers.”
https://www.jadaliyya.com/Details/41874/A-Call-for-Solidarity-Working-Class-Struggles-in-Iran-and-the-United-States