The Message from the Israeli Public: 'No Concessions!'

According to a Jerusalem Post-sponsored Smith Research poll, most Israelis view outposts and settlements in the West Bank far differently than they are seen by the US Government. The outcome is a negative shift in their opinion of the Obama Administration.

Concerning the Policies of the Obama Administration:

The poll was conducted of 500 Israelis after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech on Sunday. Fifty percent considered the Obama Administration's policies more pro-Palestinian than pro-Israel, 36 percent stated that the Adminstration was neutral, while the rest did not give an opinion.

This was a marked shift from a poll conducted on May 17, on the eve of the meeting between Netanyahu and Obama. Then, 31 percent thought that US policies were pro-Israel whereas 14 percent considered them as anti-Israel and 40 percent labeled the policies of the US neutral. And, in the last months of the Bush Administration, 88 percent stated that the US policies were pro-Israel, whereas 7 percent said that Bush was neutral and 2 percent labeled him pro-Palestinian.

Concerning the Palestinian Policy of Benjamin Netanyahu:

On Benjamin Netanyahu's vision of a demilitarized Palestinian state, 70 percent affirmed their Prime Minister's policy and 27 percent opposed.

Concerning Illegal Outposts and Settlements:

The removal of illegal settlements and outpostsi was favoured by 57 perecent while 38 percent were against. More than half (52 percent) also favoured freezing far-flung settlements vs. 42 percent was against. However, on the large settlements like Gush Etzion, Ma'aleh Adumim, and Ariel, only 27 percent favoured freezing construction with 69 percent opposing.

Iran after the Elections: Confession, Accusation and Warning from Israel

The Latest from Iran (18 June): From Green to “A Sea of Black”

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS- SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED

After  the Guardian Council announced its decision to review the vote in the Iranian Presidential election, a confession, an accusation and a warning came from Israel on Tuesday.

A Confession:

Mossad chief Meir Dagan said that Israel would in fact have an easier time explaining the threat of Iranian nuclear weapons to the world when the country is led by a hard-line fanatic president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than if Mir Hossein Mousavi, who is seen as a moderate, would win the election. He added: "We mustn't forget Mousavi is the one who started the nuclear program."

Dagan's statement was an inadvertent reminder of how much Osama bin Laden wanted George W. Bush instead of John Kerry to win the  2004 election. In his videotape, bin Laden said: "We had no difficulty in dealing with Bush and his administration because they resemble the regimes in our countries, half of which are ruled by the military and the other half by the sons of kings. . . . They have a lot of pride, arrogance, greed and thievery.”

Just as al-Qaeda tries to recruit men and obtain arms on the grounds of a "legitimate struggle’" supporting local Afghans, Arabs and Pakistanis, Mr. Dagan’s statement tries to maintain the stability of fear --- better your enemy who is in power than a challenger who might not be quite so menacing.

An Accusation:

According to the Jerusalem Post, Hamas members are helping Iranian officials crush supporters of opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi. The assertion is based on the unverified claims of two protestors. Indeed, in almost 2000 words, "Hamas" is only mentioned three times. The real target of the piece is the Iranian Government.

A Warning:

Meir Dagan stated that Iran would have a nuclear bomb ready for use by 2014. There is no evidence to counter the current US intelligence assessment that it has obtained no evidence Iran has resumed its nuclear weapons programme, suspended in 2003, and it takes no account of the current US strategy of "engagement" with Tehran. It does, however, maintain the notion of the "existential threat" of Iran.

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."