What Israel Needs from Iran: Threat, Not Democracy

The recent warning of Meir Dagan, head of the Israeli intelligence service Mossad, that Iran would have a nuclear bomb ready for use by 2014 was echoed by the Israeli Chief of General Staff, Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi, on Thursday. Speaking at a graduation ceremony for new Air Force pilots in Hatzerim, Ashkenazi said:

The reelection of the Iranian president, his remarks on his intention to harm Israel, and his efforts to obtain unconventional weapons, require us to be prepared to deal with every threat, far away and nearby… As the chief of general staff I know - only a strong and high quality IDF will keep war at bay and if necessary, will subdue the enemy and win.

According to Ashkenazi, the only way to feel secure is to ensure that Israeli society is on a permanent military footing.

Support for Ashenazi came from Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak: “Our hope is that this will not be required but in the Middle East, the threats posed to our security are not theoretical.” Barak underlined "the unique situation" in which Israel faced "the threat of being wiped out" by an "irrational dictator":

The scope of threats against us has widened from Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists to Iran, which is working to attain nuclear capabilities. We will not remove any option from the table and advise others to do the same.

Of course, those "others" who have not understood the importance of the threat include the Obama Administration.

Israel-Palestine: Netanyahu-Mitchell Talks Postponed

Here's a news item that, amidst other crises, slipped under the radar: "A meeting between Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US Envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell originally scheduled to take place in Paris on Thursday has been postponed with no new date set."

This was supposed to be the follow-up to President Obama's Cairo initiative but the US-Israel row over Israeli settlements in the West Bank is still at the centre of relations. Netayanhu's recent speech has not removed that obstacle; to the contrary, it indicates that Tel Aviv is holding its position.

So the process reverts to another visit by Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak to Washington on Monday. Barak had privately and publicly more receptive of the US position, but on Tuesday he was reported "to have approved the construction of 240 housing units" in the Israeli settlements. A State Department spokesman, Ian Kelly, announced the Mitchell-Netanyahu suspension and added:

I’ll reiterate our – what we always say or what I always say and what others say: We oppose continued settlement activity. All parties have the responsibility to help create the context that will support renewed, meaningful negotiations that can be concluded quickly. The bottom line is that we expect all parties to honor their commitments. Our position is that settlement activity has to stop consistent with the Roadmap.

UPDATED Israel-Palestine: US Envoy Mitchell Talks, Netanyahu Tries to Seize Control

Related Post: Netanyahu Staff Launch Attack on Obama White House

UPDATE (13:15 GMT): After his meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas today, George Mitchell restated his mantra that both sides should adhere to the 2003 "road map". Significantly, however, he made explicit the US commitment to an outcome with an independent Palestine: "The only viable resolution to this conflict is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states."

President Obama's envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, visited Israeli leaders on Tuesday and again established why he is an outstanding diplomat. Only problem? Someone is trying to out-flank him, and that someone is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

After discussions with Netanyahu, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and President Shimon Peres. Rather, Mitchell showed his ability to make a suitable statement to the press without revealing any substance of the talks. Mitchell had told Netanyahu, ""We are two allies, two friends, and our commitment to Israel's security is unshakeable....We come here to talk not as adversaries in disagreement but as friends in discussion."

As for the issues, Mitchell said they were "complex and many. But we hope that we're going to work our way through them to achieve the objective that we share with [Israel], and that is peace, security, and prosperity throughout the region." President Peres' office gave the vaguest of explanations in a statement (no doubt agreed with Mitchell) that all parties “have a responsibility to meet their obligations under the road map". There was no specific reference to the touchstone issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which is in that 2003 "road map". (Indeed, there was so little on the surface to "report" that The Washington Post did not even bother to cover the story.)

Beyond Mitchell, however, Israeli officials had offered more than enough to flesh out the current state of US-Israel talks and tensions. The Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, disguising its sources, revealed that Mitchell had "reiterated...that the Obama administration is adamantly insisting on a freeze of construction in all Israeli settlements in the West Bank", although he "demonstrated a more moderate tack in discussing his government's disagreements". The Jerusalem Post, courtesy of Netanyahu's office, offered the other side of the coin: while a senior official said there was a move towards "definition of the issues" with some "convergence", "Mitchell..was told that Israel would not bring all settlement construction to a complete halt".

These leaks, however, are far from the entire story. Indeed, it appears that the Mitchell discussions are an (important sideshow) to the main event: Netanyahu's manoeuvres to seize control of the Palestine issue.

On Sunday, the Israeli Prime Minister declared that he would make a "major" speech on foreign policy in the following week. Later he talked to Barack Obama by phone, no doubt exchanging pleasantries about the arrival of the President's envoy.

Within hours of that talk, however, the Prime Minister moved aggressively. "Netanyahu's confidants" told Ha'aretz, "[He] believes that U.S. President Barack Obama wants a confrontation with Israel, based on Obama's speech in Cairo last week." Netanyahu's office also is the probable source of press stories that Obama is making unreasonable demands for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement by the end of July:

Netanyahu expects Obama to present his plan for peace in the Middle East next month. He fears that the president will present positions that will not be easy for Israel to accept, such as a demand to withdraw to the lines of June 4, 1967.

And here's the twist in the tale. The immediate challenge to Netanyahu may not come from Washington: with no immediate concessions, Mitchell moves today to talks with Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas to keep all the pieces in play. Instead, the Prime Minister was openly opposed last night by his own Defense Minister, Ehud Barak.

Speaking to veterans of the Israeli military and intelligence services last night, Barak declared, in the paraphrasing of Ha'aretz:

It would be a mistake for Israel to be the one preventing Obama from trying to bring a peace agreement to the Middle East....If we do not accept the two-state solution, we will find ourselves with an apartheid policy or a state in which we are the minority.

Barak added the caveat that, up to now, the responsibility for the failure to get a solution lay with the Palestinians: "For years, we have tried to reach just such an agreement, but always failed because of the other side." He said that Israel had to maintain flexibility as it sought a settlement that "cannot be reopened again in the future".

The Palestinians, however, are in the distance. For now, the main concern of the US and even of some in the Israeli Cabinet is Benjamin Netanyahu. What will he say on Sunday? Barak replied directly to the question, "I don't know. I have guesses, but nothing more."