“Wait till you see how Obama’s gonna pressure Bibi,” a very smart analyst and activist on Israeli-Palestinian issues confidently predicted to me in early 2009. Maybe, I replied. But having been round the block more than a few times on the matter of pressuring Israel, I knew better.
There would be tension and drama with plenty of ups and downs. But serious pressure on Israel? As the late Yitzhak Rabin used to say on so many other matters, you can forget about it.
So should Benjamin Netanyahu worry about Joe Biden?
A Biden administration will be eager to separate itself from the policies of its predecessor and restore credibility to U.S. foreign policy, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would seem like a prime candidate for a decisive pivot away from the Trump era.
After all, for most mainstream Democrats, let alone progressives, if not an entire younger generation of Democrats, Donald Trump represents Satan’s finger on earth, mirrored by Benjamin Netanyahu – a self-styled Trump mini-me.
Add to that the exhaustion and disillusionment with the illiberal policies of an indicted, and now longest serving, prime minister in Israel’s history; sprinkle in a pinch of possible annexation; combine a touch of growing anger over a 53 year occupation, and you have a witches brew of troubles just waiting to create major tensions with a Biden White House.
Haaretz commentator and Netanyahu biographer Anshel Pfeffer says Netanyahu should be very worried, crediting Biden as the reason there’s been no annexation. With Trump’s poll numbers plummeting, Netanyahu can’t be certain his friend and ally will even be around in January 2021. So why get off on the wrong foot with a new American president, who’s also a longtime friend?
Maybe. But there’s a compelling case to be made, especially when it comes to the low-returns peace process, that Biden will have a few other things on his mind – specifically, putting America back together again. And with that pressing agenda, fighting with Israel about the Palestinians is certainly not even in the top ten.
The idea that Joe Biden will be the first U.S. president since George H.W. Bush to bring serious pressure on Israel is based more on hope than experience.
Clearly if Biden wins, the years of giving all the honey to Israel and nothing but vinegar to the Palestinians is over. A new administration would – at least rhetorically – make an issue of settlement activity. Biden has opposed annexation, without threatening consequences; accepted Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and the move of the U.S. embassy there; and opposed conditioning aid.
And by the looks of the more-Biden-than-Sanders Democratic party platform (two states, anti-BDS, against settlement expansion and annexation but no mention of the word "occupation") – it seems pretty much pro-Israel business as usual.
Bibi has wrestled with two Democratic presidents and seen them come and go. And unlike Clinton and Obama, he’s got a long-standing relationship with Biden and likely figures he’s got some room to maneuver.
Then there’s the question of priorities. Governing is about choosing. Biden will be faced with a galactic challenge of national recovery that surpasses even Roosevelt’s in the wake of the Great Depression, with no triumphant victory in World War Two to bail the country out. A terrible trifecta – pandemic, economic recession and strife driven by racial and economic injustice haunts the land.
Biden’s time, resources, energy and political capital will be devoted to that recovery; it will define his presidency.
And besides, there is no peace process worth fighting about. Bush and Baker risked pressuring Israel in the early 1990s because there was something at stake worth the effort – an unprecedented peace conference in Madrid. What’s Biden’s reward? Trying to preserve a two state solution that’s rapidly going the way of the dodo? Laying the groundwork for a futuristic one state solution untethered from reality?
It will be interesting to see Biden the candidate’s reaction should Netanyahu go ahead with any of his annexation plans. If Netanyahu annexes key settlement blocs in the Jerusalem area – territory it is clear Israel would have kept as a result of a negotiation with Palestinians – Candidate Biden will need to oppose it vigorously, as a harmful unilateral action.
But it’s arguable what President Biden would or could do eight months later to try to reverse the decision. Most likely very little. Should Netanyahu do something astonishingly foolish like annexing the Jordan Valley or other large areas of the West Bank, a much harsher reaction might follow.
And that’s precisely the point. Unless Israelis and Palestinians give a President Biden a reason to get involved – either through a bloody confrontation, some destructive unilateral act or, less likely, some diplomatic initiative, he will have little reason to engage in any major way. There will be an effort to improve ties with the Palestinians, more chatter about a two-state solution; handwringing by the Europeans; and Obama-era unpleasantness with Israel over settlements and the like.
As for any serious entanglement with Israel on the peace process, that’s highly unlikely unless Netanyahu does something really reckless. If tensions do flare, more than likely they‘ll be over a Biden administration effort to engage on the Iran nuclear issue not over a non-existent peace process.
And even here, Washington will likely seek to correct some of the deficiencies in the Iran nuclear deal and buy off and coopt Israel in other areas. If the Democrats take the Senate, Bibi may have few options to oppose it. Certainly there will be will be no more endruns around the administration as Bibi did with Congress under Obama.
So should Netanyahu be worried about Joe Biden? Yes. But only if he does something preternaturally stupid or reckless, and not because Biden himself triggers a confrontation, or a reckoning. Indeed, if Bibi finds himself in a major confrontation with Biden, he’ll almost certainly have nobody but himself to blame.
Comments(2)
Israel cannot annex anything in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) because the last legal entity, the Ottoman empire, does not exist anymore. Article 80 of the U.N. Charter memorializes Israel's rights in Judea and Samaria, so the proper term would be extending sovereignty, rather than annexation. Furthermore, whoever thinks it's possible to prevent weapons smuggling into Judea and Samaria and disastrous demographic changes without controlling the Jordan valley is fooling himself and living in a fantasy world
Negotiations with Iran will mean giving up the sanctions. A highly dubious move given Tehran's proclivity to attempt regional hegemony. And then there is the China-Iran-Russia entente. October will decide the Trump response to the selling of arms to the Islamic Republic. Remember, conventional arms sales will be the first sunset clause of the JCPOA to be withdrawn. How will the Biden campaign react to a Trump trigger of the automatic sanctions mechanism? Will Biden side with Russia and China? Such a move by the Democrats would play negatively against the tough-on-China approach by Trump and the Republicans. In fact, Biden's China-Russia policy will be very closely scrutinized through an Iranian appeasement prism. The Obama Administration was soft on Iran, and the potential Republican candidates for 2024 have already begun their criticisms -- see Nikki Halley remarks to the Jewish Republican organization. Like America's debt trap -- interest rates must stay low to avoid capsizing the federal budget, but in doing so total debt rises astronomically -- Biden will be caught with the appeasement tag on Iran, China and Russia if he attempts to re-institute the flawed JCPOA . Obama never had the type geopolitical climate that has now been fostered by the anti-globalization populism of both US political parties. Biden appears now to have finally embraced this populist sentiment and his foreign policy choices will be monitored in a Trump-like "America First" direction. Sanctions-lifting trade with Iran is a political loser. As far as an Israel-Palestine "two-state solution" is concerned: It's time to stop beating a dead horse! Like the Arab Spring, the Oslo process has failed and its ruins are everywhere. The Arab world is in retreat, and the moderates are begging for US leadership in the face of challenges from Iran and Turkey. Where are the Palestinians? Where they have always been -- in the camp of whichever radical nation gives them the most hope. Remember Hamas and the PLO continued with terrorism even after Oslo was signed. It is high time to get past the fantastical proposition that there can be a second partition of the geography between Amman and Tel Aviv. The final borders for Israel proper will be the green-line with a security presence on and above the Jordan River Valley. But an independent Palestinian State west of the river -- never! Democracy in Jordan (with a Palestinian majority) and shared-rule on the West Bank offers the best direction forward.
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.