Archive for November 8, 2012

Analysis: Jewish backing for Obama good for Israel

November 8, 2012

Analysis: Jewish backin… JPost – 2012: The US Presidential race.

11/08/2012 01:24
Let us all now join together in helping Obama in his efforts to assure Israel’s security, to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, and to help bring about a secure peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

US President Obama at a campaign rally [file]

Photo: Jason Reed / Reuters

President Barack Obama won reelection by a significant majority of the electoral college. The Jewish, pro-Israel Democratic vote helped him in Florida, Ohio and even Virginia, but he might have won at least some of those battleground states without Jewish support.

Even those Jews who berated Democrats like me for supporting President Obama’s reelection, must now realize that our support for the president will be good for Israel over the next four years. Recall what former Secretary of State James Baker, who served under the first George Bush, reportedly said in the early 1990s: “F––– the Jews, they don’t vote for us.”

Well that’s no longer true. Today, Jews vote for both parties. Nobody is ignoring us. Every rational candidate knows that they and their party must earn our votes in every election.

This is not to suggest that Jews as a group are single issue voters.

Most Jews care deeply about Israel’s security – as distinguished from Israel’s settlement policies. They also care deeply about social and economic issues. The difference is that most Americans, regardless of religion, are united in support of Israel’s security, but divided about social and economic issues. It is critically important that support for Israel’s security remains a bipartisan issue, and never becomes a wedge issue that divides voters along party lines, as it has in some European countries.

It is true that there is more division about Israel’s security within the Democratic Party than within the Republican Party.

More Democrats than Republicans oppose Israel on a wide range of matters, as was evident by the loud booing from some delegates to the Democratic Convention when the Democratic Party changed their platform to include a positive reference to Jerusalem.

I, and other Jewish Democrats, helped to get that change made, just as we repeatedly helped to marginalize those anti-Israel elements within the Democratic Party.

The fact that those anti-Israel Democrats are trying to use their influence against Israel is a good reason why Jewish Democratic supporters of Israel must remain within the Democratic Party to keep fighting the good fight, just as Jewish Republican supporters of Israel fought the good fight against Patrick Buchanan and other right wing Israel-bashers within the Republican Party.

Barack Obama will be the president of the United States for the next four years. That is the reality. It is also the reality that I and others who support him will have his ear over the next four years.

We will not always agree with every position he takes on Israel, and he will not always agree with every bit of advice we offer him.

That is the nature of democracy and governance.

But it is a good thing that he was reelected with significant Jewish, pro-Israel support. And it is a good thing that support for Israel’s security remained a bipartisan issue, and that President Obama’s reelection is not seen as referendum over support for Israel. A referendum that Israel would have lost if some Jewish supporters of Israel had been successful in turning this election into a false litmus test over Israel.

Israeli political leaders should not try to influence the outcome of American elections, any more than American political leaders should try to influence the outcomes of Israeli elections. Both nations, steeped in the traditions of contentious democracy, should elect leaders who serve the interests of their people. In my opinion, the interests of both Americans and Israelis are well served by a strong and enduring alliance between two great democracies that have common interests in a peaceful and secure resolution of the Middle East conflicts than endanger the region and the world.

Let us all now join together in helping President Obama in his efforts to assure Israel’s security, to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, and to help bring about a secure peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

Obama aims to start nuclear talks with Iran next month

November 8, 2012

Obama aims to start nuclear talks with Iran next month.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report November 8, 2012, 11:10 AM (GMT+02:00)

They agree on direct talks – but not the date

After winning a second White House term, US President Barack Obama aims to start direct, fast-track nuclear talks with Tehran as soon as December, even before his January swearing-in,  because Iran’s window of opportunity is very narrow – just three months, debkafile’s Washington sources disclose.

White House go-betweens with the office of Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei report that he has a set March 2013 as his deadline for the talks to end, because then Iran’s campaign for the June 14 presidential election gets going.
But Tehran would prefer nuclear diplomacy to be delayed for eight months until after that election. “We waited for the US election campaign to be over, so why shouldn’t the Americans wait for ours?” a senior Iranian official asked rhetorically.
Until March, it is estimated in Washington, that Khamenei, whose ill health keeps his working-day short, will be fully absorbed in a struggle to purge Iran’s political hierarchy of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his clique. He is therefore on the lookout for a surprise candidate to fill his place.

This time, the supreme leader won’t make the mistake of choosing a charismatic, ambitious and competent figure like Ahmadinejad, but rather one who is satisfied with acting as a representative titular figure and play second fiddle to Khamenei whose bureau will administer the executive branch of government.
The supreme leader is also weighing another alternative: having parliament abolish the post of president and transferring its powers to the new post of prime minister, who would be chosen from among the 290 Majlis lawmakers.
Speaker Ali Larijani and his brother, head of the judiciary Sadeq Larijani, have in the past year performed the spadework of sidelining Ahmadinejad’s parliamentary faction.
Ali Larijani himself is a front-runner for the job of Revolutionary Iran’s first prime minister.
The view in Washington today is that if nuclear talks do start in December and roll on into March, Khamenei will be compelled to cut the process short to escape potential accusations led by Ahmadinejad that he is handing to America concessions excessive enough to stall Iran’s nuclear aspirations.
The supreme leader can’t afford to have the Iran’s military establishment, the Revolutionary Guards and the street turn against him on this issue.

But in the last few days, Tehran appears to be unready for direct negotiations with Washington in principle. Just hours after Obama’s election victory was announced on Nov. 7, Iran put spokes in the wheel.
In a statement run by the official Iranian news agency, Sadeq Larijani condemned US sanctions as “crimes against the Iranian people.” He said relations with America “cannot be possible overnight” and the US president should not expect rapid new negotiations with Tehran. “Americans should not think they can hold our nation to ransom by coming to the negotiating table,” was the Iranian judiciary head’s parting shot for Obama.

The gap between Washington and Tehran is as wide as ever: Obama wants the three-month round of talks to end in an agreed settlement of the nuclear dispute, whereas the ayatollah prefers a low-key process to be dragged out past the eight month-month period while at the same time giving Iran’s nuclear program more time to race forward.
This tactic would additionally help Tehran erase yet another Israeli red line, the one set by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his UN September speech when he said that the spring or early summer of 2013 would be the critical date for Israel to act.

Barack, Bibi and the bomb

November 8, 2012

Barack, Bibi and the bomb – JPost – Diplomacy & Politics.

By ILAN EVYATAR
11/08/2012 00:40
With another four years booked in the Oval Office, Barack Obama will be weighing his options on the Middle East. One thing though is for sure: Iran will be high on his agenda.

US President Obama, PM Netanyahu at White Hous

Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa

With another four years booked in the Oval Office, Barack Obama will be weighing his options on the Middle East. He may decide to push Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians in order to get the peace process back in motion, or, he may decide, having had his fingers burnt in his previous attempt at getting the sides to sit down together, to simply stay away from the conflict.

He may also decide – despite Rahm Emanuel’s assertions that there will be no revenge factor – that it’s “payback time” for Binyamin Netanyahu’s perceived intransigence on the Palestinian issue and interference in the US elections.

One thing though is for sure: Iran will be on the president’s mind.

“It’s going to be very high on the agenda,” Martin Indyk, a former United States ambassador to Israel during the Clinton administration, who is now the director for foreign policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said yesterday of Iran’s nuclear program.

Obama, say Washington insiders, can be expected to give Iran a last chance to come to the negotiating table with a serious offer that will satisfy the Western powers – and Israel – that it has given up on any nuclear weapons ambition.

Obama could, despite Iran’s post-election protestations that “relations are not possible overnight,” even offer Tehran a “grand bargain” that includes renewed diplomatic ties between the countries.

The president, though, may not have time on his hands in his efforts to reach a diplomatic solution. With Netanyahu also likely to gain another term in January’s elections, Obama will be watching Israel’s nuclear Iran clock tick down.

While the threat of an Israeli strike may have eased over the last couple of months, a reelected Netanyahu can be expected to turn the pressure back up. Netanyahu set his nuclear red line during a speech in late September before the UN General Assembly.

It would, said Netanyahu, be “next spring, next summer at most,” before Iran reaches the medium enrichment stage from which production of a nuclear bomb is no more than weeks or months away.

If Tehran drags its feet or refuses to play ball, Obama will be faced with a dilemma to continue the path of sanctions, exercise its own military option, or risk unilateral Israeli action. Indyk says he believes that if negotiations fail, Obama will use force to eliminate Tehran’s nuclear capability.

If Obama does decide on a strike, payback time may not be long in coming.

As Indyk put it, Obama will follow up on military action by saying, “Look I’ve dealt with the Iranian issue, now it’s your turn to make progress on the Palestinian issue.”