The very public row over the Israeli Government's humiliation
of US vice-president Joe Biden has led to excited speculation
that the US Government might actually defy Israel this time.
Don't hold your breath.
US Vice President Joseph Biden (left) gestures as he walks
with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas ahead of their
meeting in the West Bank city of Ramallah. Mr Biden
publicly scolded Israel over a Jewish settlement plan,
saying it was undermining peace efforts. Photo by AP.
The White House has not actually prevailed in a policy
dispute with Israel since 1991, when George Bush Sen's
government denied loan guarantees to Israel until it stopped
expanding Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian
territories. Mr Bush believes his action cost him the 1992
election, and the settlements were soon growing again.
Bill Clinton took umbrage when Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Bibi Netanyahu lectured and hectored him during
their first meeting in 1997. "Who's the superpower here?" Mr
Clinton asked. But he never dared to put real pressure on Mr
Netanyahu, even when he disapproved of his policies - which
he generally did.
Mr Biden's visit to Israel last week was meant to bestow
Washington's blessing on "indirect" talks between the Israeli
Government and the Palestinian Authority: that is,
"proximity" talks in which the Palestinians and the Israelis,
in the same building, would each talk to American mediators
but not directly to each other. It was a clumsy arrangement,
but the best the White House could do.
Mr Netanyahu became Israel's prime minister again a month
after Barack Obama took office. Mr Obama had promised to
restart Middle East peace negotiations, but Mr Netanyahu led
a right-wing coalition that would collapse if he made any
major concessions about Jewish settlements in West Bank. It
was never going to be a comfortable relationship.
Mr Obama had already got Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to
agree to new peace talks by promising him that Israel would
stop building new Jewish settlements in the occupied
territories.
That was a bottom line for the Palestinians, who had watched
the Jewish population of the West Bank double to almost
500,000 people in more than 100 settlements since the Oslo
Accords (the start of the "peace process") were signed in
1993.
So Mr Obama asked Mr Netanyahu to "freeze" further
construction in the settlements. Mr Netanyahu ignored his
request for four months, and then offered a "temporary"
10-month halt to new construction in the West Bank but work
would continue on 3000 new housing units already under
construction and on infrastructure projects.
This was a far cry from what Mr Obama had requested, but he
acknowledged defeat and switched his efforts to forcing the
Palestinians to accept less than half a loaf.
Mr Abbas could not submit to this rebuff without committing
political suicide, and so the direct peace talks Mr Obama had
envisaged were downgraded to "proximity" talks.
This arrangement suited Mr Netanyahu, whose main goal is to
avoid a US-backed peace proposal that involves a halt to the
current rapid growth of Jewish settlements in the Palestinian
occupied territories, or even a retreat from them.
So he did not need the political ambush that wrecked Mr
Biden's visit last week, and he probably did not plan it.
While Mr Biden was still in Israel, the interior ministry
announced a decision by a Jerusalem district planning
committee to build 1600 new homes for Jews in occupied East
Jerusalem.
It made both Mr Abbas and Mr Biden look like fools - and even
if Mr Netanyahu did not intend the insult, he refused to
cancel the plan. He just apologised for the poor timing.
Vice-president Biden was very cross: "I condemn the decision
by the government of Israel to advance planning for new
housing units in East Jerusalem. The announcement ... is
precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need
right now."
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the Israeli move
was "an insult to the US", and told Mr Netanyahu by phone
that it was "a deeply negative signal" about the US-Israeli
relationship.
"This was an affront, it was an insult but most importantly
it undermined this very fragile effort to bring peace to that
region," said David Axelrod, one of Mr Obama's closest aides.
"For this announcement to come at that time was very
destructive."
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.