The past week has seen the surprising destabilisation in a traditionally strong relationship between the United States and Israel. Many have criticised the relationship between the two allies as too friendly, and the US has been constantly accused of guarding the Middle Eastern state against all comers, regardless of its actions.
However there was a perceived rejection of Vice President Joe Biden this month, who visited the Middle East in order to warm up both the Israelis and Palestinians for another go at getting a peace plan back on track. His visit was overshadowed considerably on the 9th March by fresh approval for more settlement construction plans, shocking many onlookers, not least President Obama. Biden condemned the move immediately; Hilary Clinton described it as “deeply negative”.
On the 22nd March the Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu visited Washington in order to speak in front of Aipac, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. During his visit it was also confirmed that the Prime Minister would meet the President for talks at the White House. The first appointment, by all accounts, went well. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was said to be a jovial mood with Netanyahu, who was listened to, appreciated and embraced during his speech to Aipac. This was despite Clinton reiterating that Israel had “difficult but necessary choices” to make, while Netanyahu hit back, saying Israel has a “right to build” in Jerusalem.
In spite of this, his meeting with the President did not go so well. The encounter began shortly after fresh permits for 20 new controversial homes to be built in East Jerusalem were announced, undoubtedly immediately cooling the mood of Obama. It was reported that the Prime Minister produced a flowchart, with which to explain to the President that the announcements, which had “insulted” the President and Vice President so much, had not been planned to coincide with either meeting.
Needless to say, Obama was unimpressed, apparently leaving Netanyahu to his own devices whilst retiring for a private dinner. Obama had wanted to secure a written agreement that Israel would halt construction in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Netanyahu however, could and would give no such assurance.
A later meeting also proved fruitless, and Netanyahu and his team retreated to the Israeli embassy, seemingly afraid of prying American eyes, and listening ears. Watchers commented that Netanyahu had looked visibly uncomfortable after talks, like a child who had been told off and sent to the naughty step. This was what some, at the very least, expected. However the way the President had treated the Prime Minister caused uproar in pro-Israeli circles, some pronouncing their anger that Obama was making friends with enemies, and making enemies of friends.
The whole affair has created a situation, in which the hope of recent times has disappeared, replaced with the ominous clouds of war. The nuclear threat presented by Iran will have the war crowd in Tel Aviv baying for action; South Lebanon is looking dangerous, with threats thrown around between Israel, Syria and Hezbollah, as well as bigger and better weapons crossing the Syrian Lebanese border in preparation for a war which Israel is already training its army to win.
In this new climate of increasing darkness, it is clear Obama is not prepared to pussy foot around, avoid stepping on feet, or be traditionally deferential to Israel’s demands. The US has sent a clear message in its treatment of Prime Minister Netanyahu. “Friends don’t take friends for granted”.
If Israel is as politically astute as many assume them to be, they would sit up, take notice, and co-operate. Anything less, and it risks standing alone, with no helping hand from a President it didn’t listen to.
