Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Great Column by Brad Burston Haaretz: If Obama Wins in November is Netanyahu in trouble

Writing in Haaretz today Bradley Burston has a very interesting comment with regards to our election.

There is something in the air. Something new. Something as recent as this week's AIPAC conference. And for Benjamin Netanyahu, it's not something to be desired.

American conservatives have begun to think out loud that Barack Obama will win in November. Citing the GOP's disastrous showing in the 1964 presidential election, influential Washington Post columnist George Will suggested this week in a tone of some resignation ("the Presidency is not everything") that conservatives might better use their energies by concentrating instead on Congressional and Senate races.

No one will be following the campaign more closely than the man adored by Republicans nationwide as the favorite son they can never adopt, Benjamin Netanyahu. And should Obama win a second term, perhaps recouping a measure of Congressional strength on his coattails, Netanyahu stands to lose as much as anyone.

Barack Obama Benjamin Netanyahu - PMO - 06032012

Much of the prime minister's policymaking strategy has been based on educated hopes for a steady decline in Obama's first-term electoral strength and a Netanyahu- friendly Republican taking the White House in 2012. Marshalling conservative allies in Congress and the Jewish community, Netanyahu seemed to have shattered the Obama administration's linkage of Israeli-Palestinian peace progress (with its attendant threats to the settlement enterprise) and resolution of other regional issues, notably Iran.

But it's a different Netanyahu coming home this week. The Prime Minister's Office is no longer betting on Obama to lose.

According to Burston Channel 10 is reporting that some officials have been remarking that "Well, If the President does get re-elected and we are restrained, hopefully he will remember that".

Another thing we is this:


Tuesday's announcement of new talks followed a visit by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the United States, where President Barack Obama said the talks offered a diplomatic chance to quiet the "drums of war".

"I'm very happy that they are opening discussions," said Netanyahu's national security adviser, Yaakov Amidror.

"There will be no one happier than us, and the prime minister said this in his own voice, if it emerges that in these talks Iran will give up on its military nuclear capability," he told Israel Radio.....

....."It should be clear that without a real military alternative, the Iranians will not relent in the negotiations. And without there being a serious alternative, they will not enter the negotiations, and in any event there has to be readiness for the negotiations failing," Amidror said.   

Netanyahu's spokesman Liran Dan said there had been no U.S. effort to veto or endorse any military action by Israel on Iran.

This coming just a week after the government had this to say regarding the U.S. deal with N. Korea

Wednesday's agreement between the United States and North Korea that would halt the latter's nuclear program is no proof that diplomacy will be enough to stop Iran's pursuit of nuclear capabilities, a senior Israeli diplomatic official said.

More to the point, that the Israelis signal Nuclear Talks COULD work, something they were not signalling before. So how does this sync with Burston's article? Well, two of the Republican Candidates are banging on the drums and calling for Bombs Away and that the Presidents approach won't work. The other (the front runner btw), Mitt Romney simply just lied about and said the President never put the "military option" on the table, even though he clearly did.

The fact that the Netanyahu government is willing to start shifting their positions publicly on this is quite interesting and telling. Perhaps, in Washington some reassurances were made, perhaps the Prime Minister saw the wind was blowing with regards to the Republican Primaries (and what a joke they have become). Who knows?

Jon Stewart captured it perfectly the other night and BruinKid over at Daily Kos got it right in this diary. I heartily recommend reading it: Jon Stewart blasts Republicans over Obama on Israel.

One interesting note is that rumor in Israel has it that PM Netanyahu is thinking of early elections in Israel. He is ahead in every poll I have seen so perhaps he wants to consolidate that now rather than waiting until 2013 (when electios are due) so he can negotiate with President Obama from a position of internal strength which presumably won't be weakened by new U.S. moves.


9 comments:

  1. I guess I don't really understand. The Burston article suggests that Netanyahu might now be considering Obama to be likely to win, and adjusting his actions accordingly, but I don't see how that puts him in electoral trouble.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry to be a tad direct, and perhaps I am missing something, but I don't find this to be a very relevant or substantive reply to my comment.

      Delete
    2. Oh man, there was a nasty comment by anonymous that I was responding to, that seems to be gone now. So much for my pithy brilliance.

      Delete
  2. Sorry I have not gotten back to you fiz - I have been away. Was there a reply to you that I missed?

    I don't think it necessarily puts Bibi in trouble as much as it puts the agenda that PM Netanyahu is striving for in trouble. The PM is known to favor the Republicans here AND it is no secret that they love him. Such is life. But, President Obama is committed to changing the status quo and creating a viable Two State solution, something that I am not at all convinced that Mr. Netanyahu or the Likud (and their allies are).

    With a Republican administration in power, the Israeli Right expects to have "free reign". With President Obama in power they would be faced with a U.S. administration that is committed to the stated position of every other U.S. Administration since the 1967 war. So... I belileve that is more of what Burston is "getting at".

    ReplyDelete
  3. Oh LOL fiz... I saw that other post. Apparently the Angry Chihuahua and his fighting Keyboardist 101st are back with their usual pithy remarks.

    You know, it's still funny three days later. Heh...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh no... your remark was great. I saw it on my alerts.... LOL

    I wonder what happened in that guys past that twisted him so hard. It's like I can't but help but feel sorry for him. I am not even mad. It's like the little dog that runs around barking at your feet. It just "white noise".

    It's gotten weird and just kind of a pathetic cry for attention.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you sure it is who you think it is? I wouldn't dismiss the possibility that it is one of the super psychos who comprise "team-P" at DK. Remember that guy who just straight out asked me for my address?? The total number of bodies in their basements has to be enormous.

      Delete
    2. I would dismiss that possibility. It is who I think it is. We have our wacknuts too fiz., I am sorry to say and he is one of them.

      Delete
    3. "Remember that guy who just straight out asked me for my address??"

      Yeah, dKos was also the first, and to date only, place I had ever been threatened with a beating due to an online disagreement, as well. Found that all kinds of fun.

      Delete