U.S.-Israel relations decline as Jerusalem apartment units climb

By Ira Sharkansky

Ira Sharkansky

JERUSALEM–Things are not happy on the US-Israel front.

Ha’aretz has taken the unusual step of putting a cartoon in the upper middle of its first page. It shows Bibi pushing a wheelbarrow full of construction material to his meeting with a scowling Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

There were two meetings in the White House, of about two and one-half hours total, with no ceremony, photographers, or agreements. Reports are that the president wanted some concessions to help him get the Palestinians to the table, and the prime minister did not deliver. Earlier in his visit to Washington the prime minister reiterated his intentions to keep building in Jerusalem. On the day of the meeting in the White House, both the president and the prime minister may have been surprised with news that Jerusalem planning authorities had approved a plan to build 20 housing units for Jews in the tense Arab neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah. 

A careful policymaker might distinguish between Israeli building in the established, mostly Jewish neighborhoods created since 1967, and the efforts of extremists to plant Jewish families in the midst of Arab neighborhoods. The first should pass without foreign concern, and the second might be singled out for condemnation.

Much of the money for the provocative housing comes from a fanatic American millionaire. He may be counting on a place in Paradise, or at least a grave plot on the Mount of Olives, and he is within his rights under both American and Israeli law. However, he may also produce another upsurge of Palestinian violence that will put numerous Palestinians as well as Israelis into their graves years ahead of time.

But judgment is not so easy.

First, the public onslaughts from Obama and others have made no distinctions between the neighborhoods of what they call East Jerusalem. And secondly, there are problems, both legal and moral, in preventing Jews from buying property and living wherever they will in Israel’s capital city. Jerusalem may not be the capital according to some views of international law, but it is the de facto capital where all major representatives of the great powers come to meet Israeli officials.

What we are seeing is an international uproar that has no future other than bitterness. It reminds us that politicians–whether American or Israeli–may be out of sync with reality and some of their own advisers. The Secretary of State and the President demand concessions from Israel, some of which seem more appropriate as subjects for negotiations rather than as conditions for beginning talks. One can also find comments from them and from others in their administration that recognize problems not associated with Israelis. They include weakness at the summit of Palestinian politics that causes extreme demands, and the failure of Arab governments to weigh in and encourage Palestinian moderation as requested by the Americans.

At its heart, President Obama’s policy is no different from that pursued by all American presidents since 1967. The point is to urge negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians, with no international recognition of changes on the ground without the agreement of the parties.

The difference is that the Obama administration is pushing harder, with shrill public criticism directed against Israel for not cooperating. It may be pressing against Palestinians and other Arab governments, and expressing disappointment in their lack of cooperation. But those actions are largely in private, perhaps due to a respect for Arab sensitivities. There is at least the hint of demonizing Israel, reinforced by the Petraeus and Biden comments about endangering American troops, as well as by Israel Apartheid Weeks on campuses and calls for boycotts and disinvestment.

Other American administrations pushed occasionally, but came to accept the impasse created by Israeli as well as Palestinian realities. It is too early to conclude that the Obama administration will not also learn that lesson. We can put it on our Passover Wish List, along with the hope that the White House will learn something about engagement with Iran. Perhaps Elijah will help, even as we give up on Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod.

Nervous Jews can relax. There is a weapon in our arsenal that has remained under wraps until now. An article on the inside page of Ha’aretz deals with gefilte fish, whose fuse is burning toward the deadline of Monday evening. American exporters are protesting, and have approached Congress about a new Israeli customs levy on imported carp. It may be junk fish to American anglers, but it’s a delicacy for Ashkenazi Israelis. The deal is obvious. Israel’s Minister of Trade and Industry will reduce the duty and risk havoc from Israeli carp growers, if the American president passes his test about geopolitics.

 *
Sharkansky is professor emeritus of political science at Hebrew University