Non-intervention with a wink
Non-intervention with a wink, Israel Hayom, Prof. Abraham Ben-Zvi, December 10, 2014
[T]he president has also indicated, with extra emphasis, that he intends to play an especially active foreign policy role, even in the twilight of his presidency, and will seek to forge a new diplomatic horizon on the Palestinian front after Israel holds its elections.
*********************
Despite unequivocal promises issued publicly by the U.S. administration just a few days ago, to refrain from intervening in the Israeli general elections campaign, it appeared the dam had already been breached on Tuesday during a speech at Bar-Ilan University by U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro.
Even though the message he delivered underwent a few cosmetic tweaks and was embedded in rhetoric of pleasantries and appeasement, the cellophane packaging and pastel colors were unable to blur the fundamental underlying significance. Indeed, underneath the heartwarming coating the ambassador time-traveled backward, straight to the beginning of the Obama era, a time when all the president’s men emphasized their belief in the linkage between diplomatic progress in the Israeli-Palestinian arena to the American superpower’s general array of diplomatic and strategic goals in the region.
And while the Arab spring shattered this conception on the jagged rocks of reality, the president has reverted — through his ambassador to Israel — to championing this idea; and at a politically sensitive time no less.
In essence, Obama is expanding and empowering the linkage principle, and is doing so while formulating an equation in which he has positioned the improvement of America’s status and clout as a superpower as a derivative of Israeli policies, and the extent to which those take into account American interests and goals, as opposed to strictly reflecting Israel’s immediate security needs and constraints.
By doing so the president has also indicated, with extra emphasis, that he intends to play an especially active foreign policy role, even in the twilight of his presidency, and will seek to forge a new diplomatic horizon on the Palestinian front after Israel holds its elections.
The goal of this message is obvious — the administration is looking squarely toward March 17 (the date of Israeli elections), and is clearly signaling that the political conditions it wants created as a result will ensure the continuation of the American-Israeli alliance with all the benefits and support associated with it.
From this perspective, the carrot of benefits is being waved alongside the whip of warnings and threats, functioning as a type of “guide for the Israeli voter,” who values this partnership with the American patron. This was indeed the opening salvo of the administration’s interventionism in the current political campaign.
Explore posts in the same categories: Foreign policy, Israeli elections, Middle East, Netanyahu, Obama, Peace processTags: Foreign Policy, Israel, Israel elections, Netanyahu, Peace Process
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Leave a comment