Elections in Israel, Iran Issue, Palestinian State: What Is Obama’s Biggest Headache?

The recent elections to the Israeli Knesset, the newly relevant issue of creation of a Palestinian state, the next round of talks on the Iran’s nuclear problem. Barack Obama’s Middle East policy is again under heavy pressure. The relations between the US President and Israel’s Prime Minister are at low ebb, largely because of Iran’s nuclear program and the US position on the issue. What steps will Washington and Jerusalem take? Commenting on the situation is Professor Georgi Mirsky, DSc. (History), Senior Research Fellow at the RAS Institute of World Economy and International Relations, RIAC expert.

The recent elections to the Israeli Knesset, the newly relevant issue of creation of a Palestinian state, the next round of talks on the Iran’s nuclear problem. Barack Obama’s Middle East policy is again under heavy pressure. The relations between the US President and Israel’s Prime Minister are at low ebb, largely because of Iran’s nuclear program and the US position on the issue. What steps will Washington and Jerusalem take? Commenting on the situation is Professor Georgi Mirsky, DSc. (History), Senior Research Fellow at the RAS Institute of World Economy and International Relations, RIAC expert.

No matter how the relations between Washington and Jerusalem might be shaping up, the USA remains the only real protector and ally of Israel. Why this has historically been the case is not always clear. Some say it is because the Jewish community plays a big role in America. Yet the community is not all that big: Jews account for just 3% of the US population and there are only a few Jewish Senators. Jews do not play a particularly big role in the military industrial complex or in the oil industry. As regards public opinion, the Jewish community in the US has a strong and influential position: 45% of educated people who form public opinion in the US, 30% of all college and university teaching staff and 26% of media people identify themselves with the Jewish community. That is why, according to opinion polls, between 70 and 80% of Americans take Israel’s side in this confrontation.

The public is on Israel’s side even in the states where Jews are a tiny minority. As long as this situation in the shaping of American public opinion prevails, there can be no change. This does not mean that Washington and Jerusalem see eye-to-eye on every issue. It was never the case under previous Washington administrations. Under almost every president, there were problem issues over which they differed. Sometimes, the result was diminished US aid to Israel. But there have never been long-lasting quarrels.

This time around, two circumstances have played a part. The first is the behaviour of Benjamin Netanyahu, who declared that there could be no question of a Palestinian state as long as he was Prime Minister. He had to publicly apologise to the Palestinians for his behaviour in order to avoid a new spiral of the conflict. Last week, Netanyahu was seen on television embracing members of the Palestinian community and apologising for his words.

Thomas Coex / AFP

Americans have no right to agree to this. The USA is a member of the UN Security Council and it cannot afford not to support UN SC 1967 Resolution 242 calling for a Palestinian state to be set up and Israeli troops withdrawn from territories occupied during the Six-Day War. The US is also in favour of compliance with the General Assembly resolution of 1947 on the basis of which Israel was created. The Resolution states that two states, one Jewish and one Arab, should be created. Finally, America cannot set itself in opposition to the European Union, which demands creation of a Palestinian state.

Second, the Iran issue is another stumbling block. The USA is going out of its way to achieve an agreement with Iran on its nuclear programme. Barack Obama knows well that, if Iran manages to enrich uranium to 90% (which will enable it to build a bomb), Israel will strike at the last moment. Iran is sure to retaliate against Israeli and American targets. That would trigger a major war, which nobody needs because this would be a war against world Islam. Obama’s main aim is to avoid such a war. So a war with Iran must be prevented by preventing an Israeli strike on it. That, in turn, means avoiding a situation that would enable Iran to build a nuclear bomb. This is the aim of the American sanctions, which have weakened Teheran economically.

So far, it is unlikely that talks with Iran will deliver a comprehensive agreement in March 2015 so, on 31 March, it will become clear what conclusion the parties will reach (the six world powers and Iran were in negotiations in Geneva when this interview went to press – ed.). At least Washington, by promising to lift sanctions, will then be able to say that conditions have been created under which Iran would not be able to build a bomb quickly. Netanyahu does not share Obama’s position, considering him to be a weak president who seeks to avoid another war at any cost. Israel’s Prime Minister does not believe any Iranian promises. Yet it would be wrong to believe that Israel is anxious to go to war with Iran, though Israeli public opinion is different. Israel is next to a big state whose leaders think that Israel has no right to exist, that the Jewish state is a “cancerous growth” needing to be cut out, as Iran’s spiritual leader Ayatollah Hamenei has said many times. It is better, therefore, to deliver a pre-emptive strike than wait until Iran completes underground tests of an atomic bomb. This is the prevailing opinion in Israel. The Prime Minister has to take it into account because he depends on the popular mood.

There is no rapport, no friendly relations between Netanyahu and Obama. The US President is unpopular in Israel. As soon as Barack Obama became President, he started interfering in Israel’s internal affairs and expressed displeasure over the expansion of Jewish settlements on the West Bank. During the recent elections in Israel, Obama clearly rooted for the government opposition, Yitzhak Herzog and Tzipi Livni. After the Likud victory, Netanyahu received a mandate to form a government within 40 days. The Israeli government is more likely than not to be right-wing, which means it will be still more difficult to achieve a compromise with Palestine and Israel’s position vis-á-vis Iran will harden. This is a serious challenge for Obama because balancing between Iran, Israel and Palestine is, by definition, an impossible task.

The interviewer was Maria Gurova, editor of the RIAC web site