BICOM

Key Points

• The upcoming meeting between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Obama takes place against a backdrop of somewhat improved relations between Washington and Jerusalem, from the low point reached following Vice-President Biden’s visit to Israel earlier this year.
• This improvement reflects a desire on both sides to create a better atmosphere, and has been helped by a number of recent events. These include the recent implementation of further sanctions against Iran, Israel’s easing of the Gaza blockade and Obama’s handling of the US response to the flotilla incidents.
• The meeting is likely to focus on the diplomatic process between the PA and Israel, the Iranian nuclear issue and Gaza.
• The question of the renewal of the settlement freeze, and the sharp objections to this among right-wing elements in the Israeli coalition, will mean that the improved atmospherics between Israel and the US conceal difficult decisions ahead for Netanyahu.

Introduction

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to hold a meeting with US President Barack Obama on Tuesday 6 July, at the White House followed by a joint press conference. The Prime Minister will then spend two days in New York, where he is scheduled to give a speech to a major Jewish organisation and give media interviews. The meeting between Obama and Netanyahu looks set to be of significance both in substantive terms and in its impact on perceptions of the relationship between the two leaders. 

Netanyahu and Obama are leaders with markedly different views of world politics and the Middle East. Nevertheless, both are committed to the stable maintenance of the strategic alliance between the United States and Israel. The meeting between them will be intended to send a message re-affirming the bond between Israel and the US. But it is also expected to focus on the substantive issues of the diplomatic process between the Israelis and Palestinians, Gaza, the Iranian nuclear threat and perhaps also the outcomes from the recent Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference. In the Israeli-Palestinian area in particular, Netanyahu continues to perform a delicate balancing act between the US and his right-wing coalition partners. The parties face difficult questions about how the diplomatic process will proceed beyond September, when the ten month period of the settlement freeze, and the four month period endorsed by the Arab League for indirect talks, are set to expire. This analysis looks at the expected main elements of the White House meeting, and assesses the forthcoming challenges facing Prime Minister Netanyahu. 

Items on the Netanyahu-Obama agenda

One purpose of the summit is to help dispel the widespread perception of Obama as a President unsympathetic to Israel’s concerns. As such, its public aspects are to include a news conference at the White House Rose Garden, at which Obama is likely to reaffirm US strategic support for Israel. This reflects what former US Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk has described as an increasingly ‘constructive working relationship’ between Obama and Netanyahu. 

Re-enforcing the message of a strong and continuing bond between Israel and the US is of importance to President Obama. The perception in Israel of an unfriendly White House and the resultant mistrust among the Israeli public lessens the chance of success for the President’s diplomacy in the Israeli-Palestinian arena. Obama is also keen to dispel the image of a rift between Washington and Jerusalem, which has concerned Democratic congressmen, before mid-term elections in November.

With regard to the substantive issues, the expiry of the settlement freeze will be high on the agenda. The 10 month moratorium on construction in Jewish West Bank settlements is due to end on September 25. The moratorium, which came in response to a US demand for a halt to settlement construction, has stopped the issuing of all new building permits in West Bank settlements. A meeting of the seven-person Israeli inner cabinet in Israel last Tuesday indicated significant opposition to its renewal. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman expressed his Israel Beiteinu faction’s opposition, as did Eli Yishai of Shas and Benny Begin of Netanyahu’s own Likud party. Netanyahu is facing wider rumblings of discontent within his party over the possible renewal of the freeze. However, an attempt to make the renewal of the freeze subject to a Knesset vote was yesterday rejected by a ministerial committee.  

Obama is understood to consider the renewal of the settlement freeze to be a vital component in maintaining the momentum in the Israeli-Palestinian diplomatic process. Nevertheless, he is also aware of the need to present Netanyahu with a situation whereby he can indicate to his constituency at home that he is receiving something in return for the renewal of the moratorium.

Defence Minister Ehud Barak, who has emerged as the figure in the current Israeli government with the closest relations to the US administration (in spite of his absence from this week’s delegation), is reported to be attempting to broker an agreement whereby in return for Palestinian agreement to commence direct talks with Israel, the freeze would be renewed. According to another report, Netanyahu may propose that construction continue to be frozen outside of major settlement blocs, in return for the renewal of construction within the blocks.

The Palestinian Authority’s position is that it is not prepared to commence direct talks, without some progress on the issues of borders and security arrangements. Israel, however, wants to discuss these issues only in direct talks. How to move forward beyond the expiry of the settlement moratorium is likely to be a central point of focus in the Obama-Netanyahu meeting. 

A second area of importance will be Gaza. During the recent crisis following the Gaza flotilla incident, Washington and Jerusalem worked closely together to defuse the crisis. Obama worked to prevent a terminal rift in Israeli-Turkish relations, secured an investigation on terms acceptable to Israel, and brought about the easing of the blockade on Gaza. It is believed that he will press Netanyahu for a further relaxation of the blockade, by calling for Israel to allow a greater number of Palestinian civilians passage out of Gaza, subject to Israeli security concerns.  

Netanyahu is likely to be tactically flexible in this regard, while seeking to maintain the common position that relations with Hamas in Gaza should not be normalised, and the organisation in its present positions cannot be considered a fit partner for dialogue. 

An additional issue which may surface is the outcome of the NPT review conference, which took place at the end of May. The US acquiesced at the conference to an Arab demand that the final document include a statement uniquely singling out Israel, urging it to sign the treaty and to place all its nuclear facilities under comprehensive IAEA safeguards. Israel believed it had assurances that the administration would reject such a statement, and this development served to re-enforce the sense in Jerusalem that the current administration is an unreliable ally. Defence Minister Barak is understood to have raised the issue in his recent visit to Washington and it is possible that Netanyahu will seek reassurances on this issue.   

Challenges facing Netanyahu

The new US led momentum on sanctions against Iran, and Netanyahu’s willingness to ease the blockade on Gaza, have helped improve terms between the US and Israel. However, recent improvements in relations are subject to reversal. If the Palestinian Authority remains unwilling to enter direct talks, Netanyahu is likely to come under heavy internal pressure to re-commence construction in the West Bank. If he accedes to it, then the Arab League support for the continued PA participation in peace talks is almost certain to be withdrawn. 

The Palestinian Authority leadership has shrewdly sought in the last few weeks to position itself so that a breakdown in the negotiations will be seen as Israel’s responsibility. (Click here for BICOM’s Analysis of the PA’s public diplomacy in Washington.) Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas held a three-hour meeting with reporters from the Israeli press last week in Ramallah, reportedly at the suggestion of the US. He tried to convey to the Israeli public his willingness to enter substantive talks on final status issues, and Israel’s reluctance to do so. The London-based Arabic newspaper, Al-Hayat, also reported over the weekend that Abbas had proposed the creation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with a possible land swap of 2.3% of the West Bank. This report has not been confirmed by PA officials.

Netanyahu’s narrative is the opposite. He argues that the most difficult final status issues, such as borders and Jerusalem, should be addressed only in direct talks, which he is ready to enter into, and it is the Palestinians who have rejected this. However, there is a growing sense on both the left and right in Israel that the Prime Minister has not managed to adequately convey a clear Israeli stance. Critics of the Prime Minister maintain that he is engaged in an endless balancing act, seeking to reconcile the ultimately irreconcilable wishes of the US administration on the one hand, and his rightist coalition partners on the other. There is evidence that influential elements within the Labor Party, the centre-left member of the governing coalition, are growing restless at what they perceive to be inaction on the diplomatic process. Some accuse Netanyahu of simply playing for time, hoping that he can keep his coalition intact until the US midterm elections in November, in the belief that a serious setback for the Democrats will reduce the administration’s ability to focus on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. 

The Prime Minister’s remarks to the Cabinet on Sunday 4 July stressed again the importance of direct talks and the need to commence these at the earliest opportunity – giving a clue as to his likely stance in the meeting with Obama. However, given the determination by the US administration to advance the Israeli-Palestinian diplomatic process, there is a growing sense that the preference of the government of Israel to concentrate on interim issues in indirect talks may not be sufficient. There are reports that US envoy George Mitchell has been frustrated by Israel’s reluctance to engage in detail with regard to substantive issues like borders.  

Many commentators in Israel are concluding that what is required is a clarification of Israel’s position. Of course, such a clarification would make it difficult for the Prime Minister to continue maintaining cordial relations with two quite separate constituencies, namely, the right-wing members of his coalition, and the US administration. It should also be noted that a possible alternative coalition involving Tzipi Livni and the centrist Kadima party still exists. This is a factor which Netanyahu may seek to utilise to keep the right-wing of his coalition in line.   

Conclusions

Netanyahu travels to Washington in an atmosphere of somewhat improved relations between the US administration and the Israeli government in recent months. The upcoming meeting between Netanyahu and Obama is likely to reflect a desire on both sides to show this. But there will also be a sharp awareness that looming major questions remain unresolved, particularly with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how to move beyond the coming deadlines in September.