HARPER: A HIGH PRICE FOR FALSE AFFECTION

 President Obama’s just-concluded visit to Israel, his first since his election in 2009, was by all accounts a public relations success.  Long-demonized among a majority of Israelis, Obama’s charm offensive won him new friends, particularly among Israel’s younger generations.  For the hardcore Likudniks, the specter of Obama being fawned over by his former harsh critic Bibi Netanyahu softened some of the hatred.

          Back in 2009, when the newly elected President Obama appointed George Mitchell as his Middle East peace envoy, ex-President Bill Clinton urged Obama to go to Israel, to marshal public support for his peace initiative. Clinton warned the President that unless he built up a base of support within Israel, Netanyahu would clean his clock and sabotage any efforts to halt settlement expansion or move ahead on a two-state solution.  Obama ignored Clinton’s sage advice and the rest is history.

          Four years later, President Obama took up the Clinton recommendation.  But the circumstances are very different now.  For one thing, President Obama’s advisors have told him that, despite a weakened political situation, Netanyahu is more adamantly opposed than ever to a halt in settlement expansion and has no intention of moving forward with a two-state solution deal.

         So, in their private talks, President Obama gave a great deal of ground to Bibi, dropping any attempt to get a settlement freeze.  In effect, Obama ripped up the Quartet agreement, under which Israel was to halt settlement expansion once the Palestinian Authority cracked down on terrorism coming from the West Bank.  The PA has fully complied with their side of the Quartet deal, and Obama just gave Netanyahu a green light to ignore Israel’s obligations.

         In return for calling for a resumption of talks between Israel and the Palestinians with no preconditions—key and code for settlement expansion—Obama extracted an unreliable promise from Netanyahu that Israel would not take any unilateral action against Iran for the foreseeable future.  Obama indicated that there was some progress at the last P5+1 talks, but it could take a year to fully explore the chance for a diplomatic settlement.  Obama provided Israel with detailed intelligence assessments of Iran’s nuclear program, making it clear that U.S. evaluations are more in line with those of Israeli intelligence.  In these talks as well, Obama made it clear that Israel has the sovereign right to defend itself against the Iranian threat, but that the U.S. was prepared to use military force if the diplomacy failed.  In effect, this amounted to a quasi-green light for Israel, given that Netanyahu’s “Red Line” for an attack on Iran is quite different than the U.S. Red Line.  For Netanyahu, the first moment that Iran approaches 225 kilos of 20 percent enriched uranium, the order goes down for an attack.

         Obama also conceded that the United States had to reassess the Arab Spring, particularly given the growing power of the most extreme Jihadists in the wake of the overthrow of Qaddafi, the Benghazi attack and the obvious leading role being played by the Al Nusra Front, an offshoot of Al Qaeda in Iraq, in the Syrian insurgency.

         And Washington also celebrated the success of the Iron Dome missile defense program by pledging a continuation of ever-expanding American military assistance.  Sequestration apparently stops at the banks of the River Jordan.

         In short, in return for a passing and soon-forgotten “feel good moment” Obama once again gave away the store to Bibi. 

Comments

[Babak Makkinejad]

Harper:

Obama has not given anything away - all that you described in regards to Palestinians were chimera and make-believe. You cannot give away that which is devoid of any substance.

Israelis, just like the period between 1967-1973, have never had it this good.

US and EU have declared Israel's enemies to be their enemies as well, there is no strategic support from a super power for their enemies, and local Muslims - Turks and Arabs - are advancing their cause.

[Matthew]

Obama's trip was a national disgrace. It was also stupid. Who tells a foreign country they will have our support regardless of their behavior?

Obama's now an object of distrust for Palestinians and an object of contempt for Israelis.

[mbrenner]

You are absolutely right - obviously. That is, obvious to everyone in the world except those in the Washington ambit, those in thrall to the US and readers of the MSM. All we were told by Landler in the NYT and his counterparts was that he had given a brave,moving "tough love" speech and personally had pulled off the diplomatic coup of the past 100 years by mediating between Netanyahu and Erdogan.

For many years I spent a few weeks every summer reading the Tunisian press (French version). Even before Ben Ali tigtened the screws several notches, it was a kept press. If one day I were an authoritarian ruler who had to choose between a Tunisian style press and the current American MSM, I'd choose the latter. Simple reason: it has far greater impact since it is presumed to be objective and honest.

[turcopolier]

mbrenner

Harper is not analysing. He/she/it actually knows. pl

[Alba Etie]

And the Arab League just announced that it has given its Syrian Seat to the Opposition . What next the Arab League calls for a 'no fly zone ' over Syria just like in Iraq ? But unlike the Libyan no fly zone - this could be the run up to a direct conflict with Iran yes ? This could get real ugly real quick . Wonder where the Russian naval forces are now ?

[DH]

"Which agree with my prediction that the US. NATO, Turkey and Israel are ginning up an attack on Syria."

Yes, well played. Is there any hope of this being an offer that Assad cannot refuse, encouraging Iran to watch her P's and Q's, and in general to carry a big stick?

Any news on Russia/China reaction? I'm guessing they'll not interfere while an enemy destroys himself.

[The beaver]

Syrian opposition leader Moaz al-Khatib is urging the US and Nato to protect rebel-held areas in northern Syria.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9954143/Syria-opposition-demands-protection-from-US-missile-shield.html

Homs has returned back to the control of Assad.

So why are the opposition concentrating on the North - Syrian Kurds strong hold ?

[DH]

Something to do with the Kurds?

"Meanwhile, a separate dynamic is seen in the Al-Hasakeh governorate, where the Kurdish Popular Protection Units – who have agreed a truce with the Free Syrian Army – clash with the, mostly foreign-recruited militia of the Al-Nusra Front, highlighting the evolving complexities of the conflict."

(Great map when scroll down.)

http://geo.acaps.org/docs/469

[DH]

"As the Syrian crisis rages on with no resolution in sight, a united Syrian opposition that includes Kurds, fighting with Arabs on the same front could finally tip the balance against Assad. Turkey can be the glue that keeps Arabs and Kurds unified if it can finally find a long-lasting solution to its decades-old Kurdish problem. Only then can Turkey reclaim its hard-fought image as a regional superpower on the Arab street and pursue a confident Syria policy without subcontracting it to Barzani. So far, Turkey has refused to meet with the PYD due to its links to the PKK. Now that Turkey can talk to Ocalan [jailed PKK leader who implored PKK in southern Turkey to lay down their arms and return to Syria] openly, maybe Foreign Minister Davutoglu could talk to the PYD leader Saleh Muslim. That would tip the balance in Syria."

http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/03/22/the_pkk_cease_fire_and_syrias_kurds

[The beaver]

The latest news I have - Syrian Kurds want to have their autonomy and have nothing to do with the official opposition ( I have mentioned that in another thread either yesterday or 2 days ago)after the FSA denied the PM a.i. position to Ghassan Hitto.

[DH]

Thanks. Do you have a notion in mind why Khatib would ask for an already secured area to be protected? I would also guess to consolidate their gained ground. Man, what a mess.

[DH]

Reuters 3/26/13

""We are still waiting for a decision from NATO to protect people's lives, not to fight but to protect lives," he added, addressing a body that barred Assad's government in late 2011.

Responding to Alkhatib's remarks, an official of the Western military alliance at its headquarters in Brussels said: "NATO has no intention to intervene militarily in Syria.""

Well, there you have it.

[The beaver]

I guess his "sponsor" Qatar does not want to have a fragmented Syria à la Iraq - Iraqi Kurds are autonomous and do whatever they want .

Why has Ocalan asked his PKK members to make peace with Erdogan, thus leaving their "brothers in arms" Syrian Kurds on the limb?

I can't put my finger on all those manoeuvrings.

[elkern]

Lebanon's PM resigned on Friday?!

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Lebanon_crisis_swells_over_security_chief_999.html

- from SpaceDaily website, which may well be of interest to others here, for other (more fun) reasons. They a few too many puff pieces about how great Iron Dome is for my taste, but I'm mostly there for the cosmology.

[DH]

"I can't put my finger on all those manoeuvrings."

Glad it's not just me.

[Clifford Kiracofe]

Elliott Abrams at the Council on Foreign Relations says we should listen to Fred Hof, a useful idiot for the Zionist cause:

"The continuing, and worsening, crisis in Syria leaves some analysts confused and their writing not very useful. The best guide to what is happening, and what the United States should do, is the writing of Fred Hof of the Atlantic Council. Hof was until last year a key figure in the making of American policy toward Syria, though we can see from his analyses that all too often his excellent advice was rejected by the Obama Administration..."
http://blogs.cfr.org/abrams/2013/03/26/what-to-do-about-syria/

[The beaver]

Who signed the AIPAC letter to Obama before his trip?
http://mjayrosenberg.com/2013/03/19/did-your-favorite-progressive-senator-sign-aipac-letter-to-obama-telling-him-to-stand-up-for-occupation-here-is-the-list/

I guess that's why it is "DROP DEAD" Palestine and more money for Iron Dome .

[Neil Richardson]

RSH:

"And what's worse - though unrelated to Syria - the US just signed a defense treaty with South Korea so that the US will respond to even MODERATE provocations by the North! Thus the next minor artillery exchange between NK and SK could result in a major war! Insanity!"

I think we should wait a bit before wondering whether this was an equivalent of Kaiser Wilhelm II giving Austria the carte blanche in 1914. It's not a treaty but a contingency plan. These tend to be updated and modified often with or without public knowledge. Clarifications tend to take place during the annual Security Consultative Meeting or sometimes principals meetings. Right now both sides are "signalling." That's why the USAF sent a B-52 (so that the KPAF could detect the signature whereas they might not have in the case of a B-2). It's just as possible that the USFK has decided to share tactical data laterally instead of going through the vertical chain. Way back when the 2ID actually had a small sector north of Imjin along the MDL, there were ROE that accounted for a lot of contingencies including the use of QRF which included a battery.

At the moment I'm not sure if the ROK marines could respond in-kind on Baengnyeongdo as the KPA has shifted the Koksans which would outrange K-9s. Since they'd been working on this since Yeunpyeungdo, I'd suspect there is a huge range of targeting options available at this point. The problem that ROK planners face is how to calibrate responses at the tactical level, and that has to be done prior to an actual provocation or they'll just repeat Yeunpyeungdo.

[DH]

I knew better than to be ironic on the internet...I was joshing you. Still, I wonder what the chances are this is a build-up aimed at a 'peaceful' transfer of power, i.e., Assad blinks.

BTW, remember at the beginning of the year the predicitions made here about 'by when' we'd attack Syria? The Ides of March have passed. (I think that might have been WRC :)

[DH]

Gotta love this line, re Hof's slippery slope analogy:

"If hand rails are to work, they must be of American design and construction."

[DH]

Give the man some credit; he did call Abbas Abu Mazen.

[turcopolier]

DH

Hof is a lot less clever than he thinks. pl

[The beaver]

yeah, I wonder who amongst those lucky Arabs who spent 5 minutes with him before his trip gave that advice about Abu Mazen to his advisers :-)

[The beaver]

After Lebanon, Iraq:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/syrian-conflicts-impact-is-felt-across-border-in-iraq/2013/03/27/d7bf14f8-964a-11e2-9e23-09dce87f75a1_story.html

The borders are 'open" so the danger is there.
Next venues : Jordan and the Golan Heights???

[Babak Makkinejad]

All:

I gather that US has very little influence on Israel as well as Saudi Arabia.

Mr. Obama has - like the clever politician that he is - taken Israel's side and thrown Palestinians under the proverbial bus.

That might be unfortunate for the Palestinians but expedient for him as well as for the United States.

After all, it was Arabs who lost Palestine on the field of battle and they ought not expect the United States to come and get their chestnuts out of the fire for them.

Am I missing something here?