It was amazing to see how US Secretary of State John Kerry seemingly panicked when he was the target of an unyielding and sharp criticism of three right-wing Israeli cabinet ministers for his citing the growing effectiveness of the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, known as the BDS Movement, against Israel for its failure or slow-paced negotiations of a fair peace deal with the Palestinians. His State Department spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, came to the rescue, underlining that “Secretary Kerry has a proud record of over three decades of steadfast support for Israel’s security and well-being, including staunch opposition to boycotts,” adding “he also expects all parties to accurately portray his record and statements” without consideration for any negative Palestinian reaction. In citing the expanding success of the BDS Movement at the Munich Security Conference, the hardworking American secretary was obviously worried about the next step should the Palestinian-Israeli peace negotiations collapse before the April deadline.
Israel’s Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz was quoted by the Jerusalem Post, an Israeli daily, as telling reporters before an Israeli cabinet meeting that Kerry’s words were “offensive, unreasonable and unacceptable,” adding that “it is impossible to expect Israel to negotiate with a gun to its head”. Housing and Construction Minister Uri Ariel said most Israelis believe that Kerry’s approach is not balanced. Economy Minister Naftali Bennett, the third most powerful figure in the coalition government, declared: “We expect our friends around the world to stand beside us, against anti-Semitic boycott efforts targeting Israel and not to be their trumpet.”
However, where the Obama administration and its European allies have been remiss is their failure to penalise Israel for its continued occupation of Palestinian territories where some half a million Israelis live in colonies illegally and Israel’s unrevealed nuclear arsenal— points that should have silenced these loud Israeli critics. Moreover, a recent but shocking study published by the Christian Science Monitor has revealed that since 1973, Israel has cost the US about $1.6 trillion (Dh5.88 trillion). “If divided by today’s population, that is more than $5,700, per American,” an estimate provided by Thomas Stauffer, a consulting economist in Washington. So far, he figures, the bill adds up to more than twice the cost of the Vietnam War. And now, the paper reported, Israeli officials at a White House meeting last month “made a pitch for $4 billion in additional military aid to defray the rising costs of dealing with the intifada (uprising) and suicide bombings (and) for more than $8 billion in loan guarantees to help the country’s recession-bound economy.”
What was also eye-catching was an exclusive report published in the New York Times last Tuesday that the influential Israeli lobby in the US, known as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) “finds itself in a very public standoff with the White House”. Recently, Aipac’s top priority, the paper explained, has been a Senate bill to impose new sanctions on Iran. But due to “stiff resistance from President Barack Obama and in what amounts to a tacit retreat, Aipac has stopped pressuring Senate Democrats to vote for the bill”. In other words, the New York Times acknowledged that Obama “has successfully made the case that passing new sanctions against Tehran now could scuffle the nuclear talks and put America on the road to another war.” What is more significant is the New York Times’ conclusion: “In doing so, the president has raised questions about the effectiveness of Aipac’s tactics and even its role as the unchallenged voice of the pro-Israel lobby in Washington.”
But Aipac’s headaches go beyond Iran, according to the paper’s reporter, Mark Landler. In September, Aipac’s “army of lobbyists” could not win Obama’s threatened military strike on Syria. Obama consequently changed his mind. The lobby also “came under fire” from the right for not opposing the nomination of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defence “because of what critics said was his anti-Israel record”. Aipac is scheduled to hold its annual meeting next month in Washington and all eyes will be focused on their agenda and speakers to judge whether this lobby group remains influential. What may help tip the balance against Aipac is the decision of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas who took another surprising step — his willingness to allow Israeli troops to stay in the Palestinian territories in the West Bank for five years, not three as he had said last week. Whether his gesture would pave the way for a peace deal with the rightist Israel government remains to be seen. But many Palestinians are doubtful, since the arrogant Benjamin Netanyahu and his clique of rightists have yet to show signs of willingness to yield to the demands of Palestinian state on 1967 “Green Line” that separates the West Bank from Israel.
George S. Hishmeh is a Washington-based columnist. He can be contacted at ghishmeh@gulfnews.com.
