|
 Following Obama’s warning that the United States would “reassess”
its relationship with Israel, the administration is not only
reconsidering the diplomatic cover it has long given Israel at the
United Nations but is also looking at a range of other possibilities
to put pressure on its historically close ally, U.S. officials said.
Those could include becoming less active in protecting Israel in
international forums and finding new ways to reinforce the message
of U.S. opposition to Jewish settlement expansion.
As internal discussions proceeded on Friday, the White House
appeared in no rush to lower the temperature in the worst
U.S.-Israeli crisis in decades, sparked by Netanyahu’s campaign
declaration that there would be no Palestinian state on his watch.
The White House made clear for a second straight day that it had
little faith in Netanyahu’s effort to backtrack since winning
Tuesday's election and insist he was in favor of a two-state
solution, long a cornerstone of U.S. Middle East policy.
There was no sign of any imminent move to turn the administration’s
heated rhetoric against Netanyahu into a tangible shift in policy.
 As a result, some analysts questioned whether Washington was merely
posturing to put the Israeli leader on the defensive at a time when
an end-of-March deadline looms in U.S.-led nuclear diplomacy with
Iran that Netanyahu vehemently opposes.
“The administration is putting everything on the table except
security assistance – and this will allow Netanyahu time to walk
back his comments more credibly,” said Daniel Kurtzer, former U.S.
ambassador to Israel. “I would also not expect any decisions before
the situation with respect to the Iran negotiations becomes
clearer.”
U.S. officials privately were mindful of the risk that the
diplomatic storm could drive a deeper wedge between the
administration and the influential U.S. pro-Israel camp and cause
problems for Obama’s fellow Democrats as the 2016 presidential
campaign approaches.
One U.S. official voiced skepticism that the administration would
shift its stance toward Israel in any substantive way, arguing that
despite White House annoyance at Netanyahu, there would likely be
too high a domestic political cost to pay for alienating pro-Israel
Americans.
“I just don’t believe in the reassessment,” said this official, who
spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of U.S.
relations with Israel.
But Dennis Ross, Obama’s former top Middle East adviser, said the
White House pressure had other motives as well.
“There’s an effort to apply leverage to the Israelis to get the
prime minister to move on some things when he has a new government
formed,” Ross said, citing a U.S. wish to see Israel release frozen
Palestinian tax funds and take other goodwill gestures.
RECONSIDERING U.S. SHIELD AT UN
Among the most serious risks for Israel would be a shift in
Washington’s posture at the United Nations.
[to top of second column] |
The United States has long stood in the way of Palestinian efforts
to get a U.N. resolution recognizing its statehood, including
threatening to use its veto, and has protected Israel from efforts
to isolate it internationally. But European governments incensed by
Netanyahu’s campaign comments against Palestinian statehood, could
join in another push for such a resolution.
David Makovsky, a former member of Obama’s team in
Israeli-Palestinian peace talks that collapsed last year, said the
question is: “Will the U.S. consider avoiding a veto over the
parameters to a final-status deal with the Palestinians?”
“There’s no doubt that this approach will lead to a firestorm
between these two governments if they go forward,” said Makovsky,
now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
Another option under consideration cited by a U.S. official could
also be controversial. A report from the administration to Congress
in coming weeks about U.S. loan guarantees to Israel, including how
much is used for settlements, could contain language critical of
expanded construction on occupied land in the West Bank.
While the United States is not likely to reverse its opposition to
the Palestinians joining the International Criminal Court next
month, Washington could become less vocal in criticizing the move.
Some U.S. lawmakers already have threatened to push for a cutoff of
U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority if it goes ahead with its
threat to seek war crimes charges against Israel for last year’s war
against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
Other possibilities include Obama's cutting back on future
one-on-one encounters with Netanyahu.
White House officials have left little doubt that Netanyahu's U.S.
ambassador, Ron Dermer, has been largely frozen out by parts of the
administration for his role in orchestrating Netanyahu’s speech to
Congress this month against Obama’s Iran diplomacy.
(Additional reporting by Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Howard Goller)
[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
