Analysis:  Israelis, Palestinians eye US midterm elections 
By  _ASSOCIATED PRESS_ (mailto:[email protected])   
10/24/2010  14:43 

There is a  foreboding sense in Israel that punishment is on the way — 
especially if Obama  emerges from the midterms unscathed. 

 
 
Israelis and Palestinians were closely watching next month's US  midterm 
race amid a sense — rarely discussed openly but very much on people's  minds —
 that the result could affect the US-led peace effort, and US President  
Barack Obama's ability to coax concessions from Israel.

Animating the  discussion is the startling fact that the United States has 
failed, despite  emphatic public appeals by Obama and weeks of increasingly 
frustrating  diplomacy, to persuade Israel to extend the settlement-building 
slowdown that  expired on September 26.


That caused Palestinians to, in effect,  suspend the US-brokered peace 
talks just weeks after they began.

The  Palestinians are now hoping that Obama has reacted mildly to Israel's 
rejection  because of political considerations ahead of the November 2 vote —
 and might be  freer to apply pressure after the elections.

"We think that if _President Obama_ 
(http://newstopics.jpost.com/topic/Barack_Obama)   emerges strong from this 
election, then this will enable him to 
work more on  foreign policy," Palestinian Authority negotiator Nabil 
Sha'ath told The  Associated Press. "If he and his party lose in the elections, 
then this will  limit his ability to pressure and actively engage in foreign 
policy. This is the  problem."

Although Israeli officials avoid discussing the topic publicly  for fear of 
alienating its most important ally, there is a foreboding sense in  Israel 
that punishment is on the way — especially if Obama emerges  unscathed.

Nahum Barnea, a respected and widely-read columnist, put it  this way in 
Friday's Yediot Ahronot:  "The problem is the disgust and rage that the 
Israeli refusal sparked in the  administration — a rage that is being 
suppressed 
at the moment, but which will  erupt in full force on November 3, after the 
elections to Congress. The  Americans are seeking the logic behind the 
refusal ... and are finding  nothing."

But if recent polls are proved accurate and Republicans take  one or both 
houses of Congress, a chastened president might be too busy or  weakened to 
pressure Jerusalem much, the thinking goes.

If Congress tilts  Republican it could have a "positive impact" on Israeli 
concerns, one adviser to  Prime Minister _Binyamin Netanyahu_ 
(http://newstopics.jpost.com/topic/Benjamin_Netanyahu)   told The AP — an 
allusion to 
avoiding pressure for concessions. With the  Democrats weakened, Israel's 
friends in Congress — both Democrat and Republican  — "would be able to have a 
stronger voice if the administration should embark on  a policy that is less 
favorable to Israel," he added.

US foreign policy  is set by the White House, not Congress. But Congress 
can influence it in the  course of the day-to-day political horse trading that 
goes on between the  executive and legislative branches.

For example, when Republicans  controlled the House of Representatives 
during Netanyahu's first term in the  late 1990s, the prime minister was able 
to 
marshal the support of the party's  conservative wing in a face-off with 
then US President Bill Clinton over  stepped-up settlement construction and 
Israeli troop pullbacks in the West  Bank.

Traditionally, both branches have been bastions of support for  Israel no 
matter which party is in charge. But conservative Republican  legislators 
tend to be less critical of Israel's contentious settlement policy  and more 
hawkish — and therefore supportive — on the security issues that are  
uppermost in Israel's mind.

The Israeli government has had, at best,  uneasy relations with Obama 
himself.

Obama took office in early 2009  promising bold changes in American policy 
in the Middle East and in one of his  first official acts appointed a 
Mideast peace envoy.

He soon traveled to  Egypt, the heart of the Arab world, in a high-profile 
gesture to Muslims. The  speech included a condemnation of Israeli 
settlements, winning over Palestinians  while alarming the Israeli government.

Tensions peaked in March over  Israel's approval of a major construction 
plan in east Jerusalem during a visit  by US _Vice President Joe  Biden_ 
(http://newstopics.jpost.com/topic/Joe_Biden) . The move infuriated Biden, and 
Obama later publicly  snubbed Netanyahu during a White House meeting. Although 
relations have mended,  Mideast peace talks launched by Obama in early 
September are at an impasse over  renewed settlement construction.

In the United States, foreign policy has  barely registered on the radar 
screen in the run-up to the election. Blamed by  many for the still-struggling 
economy and unemployment hovering around 10  percent, the Democrats find 
their majority at risk, especially in the House of  Representatives, where all 
435 seats are on the ballot.

Republicans could  also make significant gains against the Democrat 
majority in the Senate, where  37 of 100 seats are up for grabs.

David Makovsky, senior fellow at the  Washington Institute for Near East 
Policy, said a hypothetical Republican  majority could be a "profound 
constraint" on Obama's ability to push Israel to  make concessions for a peace 
deal. 
But he also said such thinking could  backfire: "It's possible that the net 
effect of his losing the ability to pass  domestic legislation might make 
him a 100 percent foreign policy president,"  said Makovsky, whose think tank 
has good relations with Israel.

Some in  Israel have expressed concerns that Obama might put forward his 
own ideas for  peace and try to impose a settlement if negotiations bog down.

Obama has  set the ambitious goal of brokering a final Israeli-Palestinian 
peace deal by  next September — hoping to do what a string of US presidents 
have failed to do  in nearly two decades of stop-and-start peace efforts.

Obama will not  "allow himself to be constrained by domestic politics if an 
opportunity avails  itself," said Aaron David Miller, a senior former State 
Department official  involved in negotiations. "He's not suicidal — but if 
there were an opportunity,  he'd go for it." 

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to