I’m not a big fan of General David Petraeus’ interference in US foreign policymaking, given his challenge to (and potential undermining) of his President on an issue such as Afghanistan, but Mark Perry in Foreign Policy offered a tale where Petraeus’ manoeuvres may lead to a significant — and, I think, productive — re-alignment in US foreign policy.
To be blunt, if you take a charitable interpretation of Petraeus’ move (he was telling the US diplomats to get out of their dead end of caving to Israeli steps such as settlement expansion) rather than the cynical one (he was again seeking to expand his authority), this may open up a prospect — limited but visible — of the US staking out a position where it can challenge Israel’s unilateral obstacles to the peace process.
On Jan. 16, two days after a killer earthquake hit Haiti, a team of senior military officers from the U.S. Central Command (responsible for overseeing American security interests in the Middle East), arrived at the Pentagon to brief Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Israel’s Ayalon on Peace: On Saturday, in an interview with the London-based Arabic daily Asharq al-Awsat, Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon talked about the conditions of the peace process with Palestinians. He pointed towards two demographically “pure” states with the swap to Palestine of Israeli Arab towns and villages in the north (except Nazareth) in exchange for Palestinians relinquishing the “right of return” to their former lands in Israel.
Ayalon denied that this was an attempt to rid Israel of the country’s Arabs: “Israel’s Arabs who are moved to Palestine will also help the Palestinian state economically”.
Ayalon also said that Israel is willing to give up land for peace and that the claim that settlements affect peace is an exaggeration; however, he did not specify how many settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem that Israel would relinquish.
UPDATED 2 FEBRUARY: Haaretz reports that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tried to persuade Defense Minister Ehud Barak to accept an Israeli investigation into civilian deaths during Operation Cast Lead. However, officials said that both Barak and Gabi Ashkenazi, the Chief of Staff of Israel Defense Forces, refused to yield authority to investigators from outside the defense establishment.
“The prime minister knows what he wants to do on this matter – but he does not want to bring the matter to the cabinet,” a senior source close to Netanyahu said.
–
With the General Assembly convening on 5 February 5 to discuss progress on the Goldstone Report and its recommendations, Israel submitted its response to United Nations over last year’s Gaza War.
The committee will reportedly have the authority to summon everyone who was in charge of the IDF investigations and any civilian who took part in the main deliberations. However, it will not have the authority to question operational commanders. The committee is likely to take testimony of lower-ranked officials, ensuring that there is no basis to send officials to international courts.
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. Read the rest of this entry »
Since I wrote this for The Guardian, there have been further developments, notably Israel’s stepped-up campaign to bump Washington into a hard-line Iran-first policy. The efforts have been more political than military, notably Tel Aviv’s threat that it will not enter meaningful negotiations over Palestine unless the US commits to further pressure upon Tehran.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton struck back yesterday, telling Israel to back off on the threat. That indicates that the Obama line of engagement is still prevailing within the Administration, as does the silence of Petraeus and Mullen over the last two weeks.
Forgive the somewhat dramatic headline, which led to a lot of irrelevant comments. The issue is not whether the US backs an Israeli airstrike but whether it suspends the gradual but clear move towards discussions with Iran.
To bomb, or not to bomb, Iran
Just over a month ago, President Barack Obama broke a 30-year embargo on US relations with Iran: he offered goodwill not only to “Iranians” but to the country’s government. Speaking on the occasion of Nowruz, the Iranian New Year, he said: Read the rest of this entry »
The article begins with a statement of the Israeli hopes for a hard line towards Tehran: “IDF Chief of Staff Lieutenant-General Gabi Ashkenazi (pictured), who is on an official visit to the United States, told his American colleagues Monday that the Iranian threat could still be handled via sanctions, but stressed that an Israeli military strike was a “serious” option.” Read the rest of this entry »
The visit to the US by Israel’s top military commander, Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi (pictured), which we noted a few days ago, has received no attention in the mainstream press. There are a couple of teasing indications on the Internet, however, of where the talks may be going.
Iran’s Press TV, in the midst of an over-wrought (and misleading) story that “U.S., Israel on the same page on Iran timeline”, offers this revelation:
Within days of Mullen’s pronouncement of close Israel-U.S. cooperation, his Israeli counterpart, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, was putting it to the test in Washington meetings with Gen. James Jones, President Obama’s national security adviser, top Pentagon brass and Dennis Ross, who shapes Iran policy at the State Department.
Subtle differences in the Hebrew and English official accounts of Ashkenazi’s meetings were telling. Read the rest of this entry »
Iran’s Press TV is a bit over-the-top with its proclamation of “simmering talks of war”, but the attention to Tehran, rather than other Middle Eastern issues, is more than justified. While interchanges between Israeli and American military leaders, as part of Tel Aviv’s special relationship with the US, are commonplace, the presence of Ross at the discussions is significant. So is the timing. Read the rest of this entry »
I’m not a big fan of General David Petraeus’ interference in US foreign policymaking, given his challenge to (and potential undermining) of his President on an issue such as Afghanistan, but Mark Perry in Foreign Policy offered a tale where Petraeus’ manoeuvres may lead to a significant — and, I think, productive — re-alignment in US foreign policy. 
Since I wrote this for The Guardian
The visit to the US by Israel’s top military commander, Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi (pictured), 
Here’s a story that has set a few tongues wagging and minds racing on the Internet.
Entries (RSS)