MEPGS: Excerpts:
As US officials appear to be backing away from a confrontation with Israel in the wake of Vice President Biden's controversial visit, there are more than a few bruised feelings on both sides. More important, it seems likely that the Israeli- US relationship is in for even tougher times in the weeks and months ahead. To begin with, it is clear that orders came from the top, no less than President Obama, that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was to be confronted over the embarrassing decision.........
The scolding delivered Secretary of State Clinton, over the phone to the Israeli Prime Minister and in person to Michael Oren, Israel's Ambassador to the US, was exceptional both in its tone and the scope of its demands.
According to published reports, Clinton not only insisted that the Israelis find a way to insure that such an embarrassment never be allowed to take place again but added three new demands. First, the US wants assurances, the now delayed "proximity talks" transition to direct talks on all topics [Previously this was an Administration assumption]. Second, they said they wanted Israel to make a gesture to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, who was already ambivalent about the value of these talks. Finally, and most controversial, Israel was to find a way to halt construction of the new housing units.
According to informed sources, a short deadline was set for Israel to respond -- a deadline that has not been met. Moreover, the tone employed by Clinton outraged Israeli officials. Said one well-placed source, "They don't talk to [Venezuelan President Hugo] Chavez that way." As this drama was unfolding, a number of senior level Administration officials, including White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel were trying to calm the waters. Others, like CENTCOM commander General David Petraeus, were, in effect, adding fuel to the fire, when in Congressional testimony, he alluded to the lack of progress on Arab-Israeli talks causing additional problems for US military planners , already engaged in combat in the muslim world. Moreover, according to well-placed sources, withholding US military and intelligence cooperation is "one of the sticks" the Administration wielded in its conversations with Netanyahu and Oren.
Even if, as many observers believe, this imbroglio in contained, a number of key officials say it is only a matter of time before Israel and the US are once again at loggerheads, if not over the peace process then over a strategy for dealing with Iran. Part of the reason for Biden's visit to Israel and that of a number of other top civilian and military leaders there in recent weeks, is to make certain, in the words of one top US official "...that Israel is `on board'" with the American approach to handling Iran's headlong rush towards nuclear development.
US officials candidly share political strategy with the Israelis regarding their approach to implementing new sanctions against Teheran at the UN and elsewhere [US officials have even gone so far as to try to enlist Israeli cooperation in fending off Congressional attempts to pass legislation penalizing foreign companies doing business with Iran. As one top US official puts it, "We know the Hill's intentions are good. Just the way they are going about it will upset our plans to work with other countries who will see their efforts as an attempt to impose `extraterritoriality' on them"].
The first goal is to get a new resolution from the Security Council. At latest count, eleven of the fifteen members have informally signed on. Brazil and Turkey continue to be a problem. Lebanon, with its dominant Iranian-backed militia, Hezbollah, is considered a lost cause. But the big prize remains China and its veto. So, far US officials have not given up hope on gaining China's acquiescence to a mild resolution but may well have to settle for an abstention. The importance of the UN vote lies in its acting as a catalyst for other nations, notably the European Union [EU] to impose a series of much stronger, if not exactly "crippling" sanctions on Iran. And the target will be the Revolutionary Guards, which according to some top US officials, now control more than one-third of the Iranian economy [The prospect of imposing sanctions on oil imports, upon which Iran, ironically is dependent because of its limited refining capacity, has been pretty much taken off of the table -- partly, say top US officials because of the difficulty of enforcing such a regime and according to others, because in could impose "undue" hardship on the average Iranian].
........But with thousands of American troops destined to remain in next door Iraq for the foreseeable future and thousands more going into battle daily in Afghanistan, another Iranian neighbor, the last thing the US military, including Defense Secretary Gates, wants is a military confrontation with Iran.
But if, as some experts argue, sanctions are doomed to failure, what are the other options? One US expert, close to Gates as well and National Security Advisor Jones, argues that it is time to jettison this "sanctions fantasy" and prepare to deal with a nuclear armed Iran. According to well-placed officials, this would mean a continued tightening of sanctions and eventual isolation of Iran from most of the world's commerce. However, opponents of this approach argue that should Israel get wind of "post nuclear planning" for Iran, Jerusalem would be sure to act unilaterally..
Already frustrated by a timetable that has slipped from last December to April for UN sanctions action [considered a good time with Japan as Security Council Chair for the month and preceding Lebanon's assumption of the role], it is clear that the Israelis are running out of patience. Moreover, intelligence sources believe that while the Israeli security establishment still is unsure of its ability to mount a highly effective attack on Iran proper, it has become increasingly confident of its ability to withstand and defeat any Iranian retaliation, notably a missile attack launched by Hezbollah on Israel's north.
A number of well-placed sources say that for Israel, 2010 is the year of decision. If by the end of the year, Iran has not started to retreat in the face of international pressure, then Israel will begin to seriously prepare for military action. As one top US official puts it, "Israel hasn't made the decision to act. But it has crossed the psychological barrier to act." If true, then today's tensions with Washington will seem quite modest. "
Posted by G, Z, or B at 12:31 PM
Posted by G, Z, or B at 12:31 PM
River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian 
a.gif)
No comments:
Post a Comment