Blogs and Stories
Why Obama Should Listen to Bibi
In his speech Sunday, the Israeli prime minister made security points that Team Obama must not ignore—and absent Palestinian concessions, he went as far on settlements as any Israeli leader could go.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today threw President Obama a couple of big bones, and the White House will label them a step in the right direction. Neither will confront the other further for a while, as both digest the Iran situation.
Bibi, as he is known, actually made some significant points that Washington shouldn’t ignore. He said a two-state solution was acceptable as long as the Palestinian state was demilitarized and it recognized Israel as a “Jewish state,” meaning no return for exiled Palestinians. Obama and the Palestinians won’t like these conditions, but they are very widely supported by Israelis and reflect legitimate security concerns. Bibi also conceded that Israel would not build “new settlements” on the West Bank, but would continue “natural growth” within existing settlements. This is about as much as any Israeli leader could do on this volatile issue, absent concessions from Palestinians.
Privately, Team Obama will let the press know that Bibi’s offerings fall short of what’s needed for negotiating progress. Publicly, they will utter kind words.
Privately, Team Obama will let the press know that Bibi’s offerings fall short of what’s needed for negotiating progress. Publicly, they will utter kind words. Obama has larger fish to fry. He wants to keep doors open for talks with Iran, as Vice President Biden said today. He can’t take on conservatives both on talking with Iran and criticizing Bibi at the same time. Priority goes to Tehran, where Obama hopes to avoid new confrontation and move toward common action in the region.
The time probably will come to beat up on Bibi. But Washington should heed Bibi’s security points and not push further until the Palestinians themselves offer compromises—which they have not done.
Meantime, these two allied leaders will restrict their serious pushing and shoving to how to handle Iran.
Leslie H. Gelb, a former New York Times columnist and senior government official, is author of Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy (HarperCollins 2009), a book that shows how to think about and use power in the 21st century. He is president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations.
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
McChrystal's Fuzzy Math
Leslie H. Gelb, a former New York Times columnist and senior government official, is author of Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy (HarperCollins 2009), a book that shows how to think about and use power in the 21st century. He is president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Stalled Out All Over the World
Leslie H. Gelb, a former New York Times columnist and senior government official, is author of Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy (HarperCollins 2009), a book that shows how to think about and use power in the 21st century. He is president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations.
At Last, An Afghan Plan
Leslie H. Gelb, a former New York Times columnist and senior government official, is author of Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy (HarperCollins 2009), a book that shows how to think about and use power in the 21st century. He is president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations.
I hope Obama takes your advice Mr. Gelb. Considering Obama's Cairo speach, Bibi's concessions bode well for for the administration. I believe with Obama and Hillary in charge they realize this.
It is unrealistic to expect the Palestinians to agree to Bibi's surrender terms. No nation can exist as a defenceless society with a long term enemy in complete control of their borders. It is just as unrealistic to allow an unchecked return of Palestinian refugees back into Israel which would lead to the abolishment of State of Israel.
The best solution to this situation is a return to the 1967 borders with Israel's security being guaranteed by NATO. A NATO base on the northern border between GAZA and Israel could function both as a security buffer for Israel and a port for goods in and out of Gaza and the rest of Palestine. Such an arrangement would allow for the long term resolution of this crisis an maybe after a few decades enough trust could be generated that the base would no longer be necessary.
That being said a long term NATO base in the Middle East may be a good thing.
Finally, someone else who believes it is the Palestinians who are lacking in concessions.
"Bibi also conceded that Israel would not build "new settlements" on the West Bank, but would continue "natural growth" within existing settlements. This is about as much as any Israeli leader could do on this volatile issue, absent concessions from Palestinians." Really? I seem to recall Ariel Sharon dismantling many settlements when he was awake... Does that not count? The idea that there can be peace while Israel keeps building internationall illegal settlements lacks any sort of reality or understanding of the situation.
Either way, the idea of creating a "demilitirized Palestinian state" is absurd... The only people, then, that will have weapons will be the fringe extremist groups, not the government.The first thing Israel should want is a centralized Palestinian state with weapons to maintain their power, and enough to justify an invasion by Israel if they threaten peace.
Currently, much like your article, Israel is a joke. You're a grown man, recognize this situation for what it is. Just because you support Israel doesn't make everythign they do right.
"Just because you support Israel doesn't make everything they do right."
Thank you... that is exactly what I think. There should not be one settlement in the West Bank. How many "Palestinian settlements" are there in Israel? Would Israel allow it? Aaaaaah, no....
As long as the U.S. exists... so will Israel. That is not up for debate, but good God... that doesn't give them the right to get away with murder.
When Bibi frustrated President Clinton, he said "Who the fuck is the superpower?"
Obama needs to make a big push. There needs to a second "Cairo" speech in Jerusalem or Damascus.
Make it clear that the absurd Jewish sense of entitlement and birth right to "Judea and Sumera" written in the Talmud is a moral abomination. (Almost as big an abomination as shellfish in the Talmud).
We are the "fucking" superpower and they are our protectorate.
"They are our protectorate."
You noticed that too.
Protectorate....
You do realise that the US only took Israel under its wing after the Six Day War?...
Prior to that Israel had other ...benefactors.
I'm not sure Israel is a protectorate.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.