AMERICA VOTES, THE WORLD WAITS Polls set Middle East timetable
By Victor Kotsev
TEL AVIV - "The next 12 months will be a 'year of decision' for [Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and [US President Barack] Obama on the
establishment of a Palestinian state and stopping the Iranian nuclear program,"
wrote prominent Israeli journalist Aluf Benn on Tuesday. Ben's calendar begins
on November 3 - the day after the mid-term congressional elections in the
United States, and ends with the approximate beginning of re-election campaign.
That US elections set the pulse of Middle Eastern geopolitics is a widely
accepted principle among analysts. My previous story for Asia Times Online [1]
outlined the debates on whether or not an internally weakened Obama would shift
his focus on foreign policy and how his foreign policy priorities would change.
(Early results show that the Republicans win a comfortable majority in the
House, while the Democrats, who retain their edge in the senate, are
considerably weakened there). The Iranian crisis and the Israeli-Palestinian
peace process feature prominently in the foreign policy spotlight. Some
additions are due that shed more light on these issues.
First, even though most of Obama's legislation will be blocked in congress, he
will still have some methods left for pushing through domestic reform. As
Charles Krauthammer wrote in the Washington Post last Thursday, "Democrats will
advance their agenda on Obamacare, financial reform and energy by means of
administrative regulation, such as carbon-emission limits imposed unilaterally
by the Environmental Protection Agency."
On the other hand, a few analysts have raised the possibility that Obama might
decide not to run for re-election and pursue a visionary agenda - something
that at this point can be accomplished mostly in the foreign policy domain. The
president announced in January that he would "rather be a good one-term
president than a mediocre two-term leader".
Jeff Barak writes for the Jerusalem Post, "Depending on the scale of Democratic
losses, Obama might come to the conclusion that he is likely to be a one-term
president and, having already been awarded (and mistakenly accepted) a Nobel
Peace Prize, the determination he showed at the beginning of his term to
produce an Israeli-Palestinian agreement might be redoubled." Veteran
negotiator and analyst Aaron David Miller also alludes to this option as a
"temptation" that Obama needs to resist. [2]
This possibility, furthermore, strengthens the camp that holds that even a
weakened Obama would still be able to put massive pressure on Israel, since the
president has more power than congress when it comes to foreign policy. "Even a
beaten, defeated president is still the US president," writes Israeli analyst
Eitan Haber, "and at worst he still has more than two years in office." A
weakened Obama, Haber adds, would also mean a weakened main ally of Israel: "a
weakened global status for Israel among the family of nations."
Both the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority are on edge following
the elections, as both seem to be afraid that the other side will strike a deal
with Obama first. According to Israeli intelligence analysis site Debka File,
Netanyahu has already agreed to extend in some form the West Bank settlement
freeze, even though negotiations probably won't restart until January. Debka's
information is partially corroborated by a report in the Israeli newspaper
Ha'aretz claiming that "Netanyahu expects Obama to resume Mideast efforts".
While it is still not clear how much attention Obama will direct at the
Israeli-Palestinian peace process, there are signs that Obama may put subtle
pressure on Israel to choose between the settlements and its nuclear program.
Israeli journalist Amir Oren persuasively makes a case for this in Ha'aretz
[3], and if the pressure increases, it would have a strong impact on Netanyahu.
Furthermore, many of Netanyahu's recent moves could be seen as a preparation
for extending the settlement freeze. The Israeli prime minister gave the
settlers a couple of months of "breathing space", even though the latter
complained of a "silent building freeze" [4] that may well be seen as an
inclination to continue the moratorium. He obliged Israeli Foreign Minister
Avigdor Lieberman - an important item on whose political agenda was the loyalty
oath that the government introduced last month - and he scored points in his
own party by openly defying the US administration. Now he can take a step back
and make some concessions, ideally in return for US and Palestinian
concessions.
Palestinian moves can also spur Israel into action. Recently, the Palestinians
have drummed up talk of declaring a state within a year, and a few days ago
threatened to turn to the UN Security Council to stop settlement expansion.
They, too, have fears. On Friday, Asharq Alawsat reported on a secret plan for
Israel to lease areas in East Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley for up to 99
years. [5] According to Israeli analyst Akiva Eldar, "PA headquarters is taking
seriously the report."
"[The Palestinians] are worried that the Americans, led by their old-new
adviser Dennis Ross, and [Israeli negotiator] Molho, his old friend, are
cooking up a surprise behind their backs,'' Eldar added. ''To prevent such
surprises, which happen during diplomatic droughts, the Egyptians are
pressuring [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud] Abbas to leave the
settlements alone, drum up some courage and present to the world a detailed
Palestinian peace plan."
There is also the crisis with Iran in all its manifestations throughout
the region. As I predicted in my previous article, those fronts are steadily
heating up. A string of clashes in Iraq over the past few days claimed the
lives of hundreds, and rolled back any American-Iranian understandings that may
have been shaping up there. As Asia Times Online's Syed Saleem Shahzad reports,
talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan have hit a dead end [6], and there are
numerous indications of Iranian interference.
The news from Syria and Lebanon is also foreboding. During a conference on
Tuesday, outgoing Israeli military intelligence chief Major-General Amos Yadlin
warned that Syria was rapidly stockpiling advanced Russian military hardware,
which could pose a significant threat to the Israeli Air Force. Hezbollah, too,
was preparing for war, both against the Lebanese government [in case its
members are implicated by an international tribunal into the killing of former
premier Rafik Hariri] and with Israel. "The next round," Yadlin cautioned,
"won't be focused on one theater but rather, will incorporate two or three ...
It will be much bigger, much wider in scope, and with many more casualties."
Suggestions that Hezbollah might overthrow the Lebanese government are
corroborated by reports that the militia recently drilled precisely this
scenario [7]. Increasingly frequent leaks regarding Hezbollah's war drills and
weapons stockpiling, moreover, could signal an Israeli campaign to prepare
global public opinion for a strike against the Shi'ite organization.
A week ago, French newspaper Le Figaro published an extraordinarily detailed
account of Hezbollah's apparatus for smuggling missiles. Several months ago,
Israel released classified pictures and intelligence of Hezballah’s use of
civilian facilities as cover for its military installations, thus foregoing a
tactical advantage for a rhetorical one. In all, it is clear that a heated
political cycle lies ahead. We will see a strong push for peace as well as a
strong push for war.
Which will prevail is yet unclear. The US mid-term elections may be crucial in
setting the approximate timing of the developments—starting now—but what will
be even more crucial is regional politics and the countless little quagmires
that could bog down Obama’s initiatives. These politics, moreover, remain as
convoluted and Byzantine as ever before, while tension rises.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
