One has to wonder where Roger Cohen gets his courage, but you’ve got to hand it to the guy. His latest column is a beauty, complete with calling out Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic for being a willing “stenographer” to Netanyahu in his recent interview. It’s not as if Bibi didn’t know Jeffrey would publish his “stop Iran or I will” threats, considering the timing of what was going on with Richard Holbrooke and Iran at that moment in The Hague.
Segue to Roger Cohen, emphasis added:
…You can’t accuse the Israelis of not crying wolf. Ehud Barak, now defense minister, said in 1996 that Iran would be producing nuclear weapons by 2004.
Now here comes Netanyahu, in an interview with his faithful stenographer Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic, spinning the latest iteration of Israel’s attempt to frame Iran as some Nazi-like incarnation of evil:
“You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs. When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying, and that is what is happening in Iran.” [...]
Gates said the same thing recently when he opined that Israel wouldn’t strike Iran this year, and that any confrontation is years away.
But let’s face it. “Crying wolf,” as Cohen calls him out, is all Netanyahu’s got. It’s his challenge to the Obama administration, which was also delivered by his mini me, Avigdor Lieberman, when he said, “The Annapolis conference, it has no validity.” Bibi is counting on his American Likudniks to have his back, which they have already promised.
Another interesting part of Cohen’s column is Iran itself, beyond its leaders, which is known but rarely acknowledged here:
Netanyahu also makes the grotesque claim that the terrible loss of life in the Iran-Iraq war (started by Iraq) “didn’t sear a terrible wound into the Iranian consciousness.” It did just that, which is why Iran’s younger generation seeks reform but not upheaval; and why the country as a whole prizes stability over military adventure.
The wild-eyed Iranian caricature might apply to Ahmadinejad, but one wonders what will happen if he loses the election in June, with a “moderate” taking his place, which is not wholly implausible. What will Bibi do then, keep “crying wolf?” Maybe that’s already figured in.
Now Obama has announced we will join in on talks with Iran over their nuclear program (lack thereof is more like it). Yet another Netanyahu worry is the U.S. and Iran have common challenges in Afghanistan. The Persians have a natural antipathy for the Sunni Taliban, but speaking practically they don’t want a flood of refugees over their border.
This brings me to a bizarre analysis from Ghaith Al-Omari, quoted in the New York Times, an article that talks about President Obama’s plain speaking in Turkey: “Let me be clear: the United States strongly supports the goal of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. That is a goal that the parties agreed to in the road map and at Annapolis. That is a goal that I will actively pursue as president.”
Got that, Mr. Lieberman? As for Prime Minister Netanyahu, Ms. Al-Omari has this to say:
“At a minimum, Bibi will need to disown these statements and come out explicitly in support of the two-state solution before his meeting with President Obama,” said Ghaith Al-Omari, a former Palestinian negotiator who now works with the American Task Force on Palestine. “If not,” Mr. Al-Omari said, “the issue will become the focus of the meeting.”
Like it wouldn’t be the focus anyway? Netanyahu’s feelings are known, and considering the clout of the Christian right Likudnik crew in this country, well, that’s part of Bibi’s equation.
The thing is, President Obama is betting too. It’s that he’s got more power on his side, including a moment in history to exploit in favor of equilibrium, as Steve Clemons identifies it (not to be confused with peace), particularly since American Jews aren’t on Bibi’s side. They’re on Barack’s, and I bet he knows it. From an April J Street survey:
By 76-24 percent, American Jews support a two-state, final status deal between Israel and the Palestinians along the lines of the agreement nearly reached eight years ago during the Camp David and Taba talks…
As for Netanyahu’s fantasy that Arab states will fall in line behind Israel on the notion they’ll see Iran as more dangerous than Bibi, well, don’t hold your breath. King Abdullah of Jordan, via Haaretz today:
“King Abdullah underscored the importance of the role of Europe and the world community in pushing forward the peace talks between the Palestinian and Israeli sides towards the establishment of just peace based on relevant UN resolutions and the Arab peace initiative,” it added.
King Abdullah’s remarks reflected concerns on the part of the Jordanian leadership as to the future of the Arab-Israeli peace process after the new right-wing government, led by Netanyahu, failed to unequivocally support the two-state formula.
Bibi “stop Iran or I will” Netanyahu and his mini me foreign minister will be in real trouble, however, if Ahmadinejad loses the upcoming election, with his disastrous economic leadership a real problem for him. As much as Netanyahu and Lieberman detest Ahmadinejad, Israel’s codependent relationship with him is what makes the Middle East go ’round… and ’round… and ’round in circles. On the other hand, the presence of Netanyahu and Lieberman might play a role in uniting hardliners and nationalists behind Ahmadinejad. But who am I kidding? If Ahmadinejad didn’t exist, Netanyahu and Lieberman would just make him up.
Equilibrium is our best hope.
