Benjamin Netanyahu

With Speech, Obama Moves Closer to Israel's Position

President Obama in his speech on May 19 has come closer to many Israeli positions than in the past, so it is a bit bizarre that the press has generally reported it as creating a crisis in American-Israeli relations.

Israel and the Europeans: On a Course to Conflict Over Jerusalem

By Orly Noy, Ir Amim's Spokesperson

A month after Prime Minister Netanyahu announced a limited "freeze" on construction in Israeli-controlled Palestinian territory, it appears that his action will not end international pressure on Israel. True, the United States welcomed the announcement and attempted to solicit positive responses from other members of the Quartet. But outside the United States, Netanyahu's belated response--described by many commentators within Israel as half-hearted--has not had the same effect. Indeed, Israel appears to be on a collision course with several European states and the newly-enhanced European Union.

A Palestinian View: A crucial but problematic triangle

For good but different reasons, their respective relations with the United States are of central and utmost importance to both Palestinians and Israelis.

As the US is the world's leading power, it is the most influential potential mediator between them. Israel is completely dependent for its overwhelming superiority on the near unquestioned military, economic and diplomatic support it receives from the US. The Palestinian Authority, meanwhile, is dependent on international support and international diplomacy, both shaped by the US.

An Israeli View: Criminal neglect

There can be little doubt that Israeli PM Binyamin Netanyahu won the first round of Israeli-Palestinian engagement with the Obama administration--and that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas lost. Netanyahu executed a partial and problematic settlement construction freeze "balanced" by settlement provocations in Jerusalem and elsewhere. He was rewarded with US support for his readiness to open negotiations while his right-wing coalition stood behind him. Abbas misread American promises and assurances regarding the freeze and the Goldstone report.

An Israeli View: Dealing with Mr. Yes and No

Back in the days of Binyamin Netanyahu's first term as prime minister, more than ten years ago, he was satirized as Mr. Yes and No. For every "yes" he delivered to US President Bill Clinton or PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, there was also a "no" or, if you like, a "yes" to the settlers and other opponents of the peace process. That appears to be where we are today, once again.

A Palestinian View: The ball is now with the international community

Binyamin Netanyahu's announcement in late November that his government would implement a settlement freeze was not taken seriously by Palestinians, Arabs or other interested and involved parties.

Palestinians warned that the announcement amounted to no more than a public relations gimmick aimed at reducing growing international criticism of Israel's settlement expansion policies. Palestinian officials made clear that the Israeli "freeze" did not signal any change to Israeli settlement expansion, which is responsible for preventing the resumption of negotiations.

An Israeli View: Neither revolutionary nor trivial

The current episode in the never-ending saga of Jerusalem-related controversies relates to a leaked draft resolution implying that the Council of the European Union expects East Jerusalem to become the capital of a future Palestinian state. Banner headlines highlighted Israel's shock and dismay over this diplomatic "outrage". At this writing, PM Binyamin Netanyahu is pulling out all the diplomatic stops to convince the Europeans to retract the offending words; it is still not known if he will succeed.

An Israeli View:The Swedish Initiative as Metaphor

The government of PM Binyamin Netanyahu has no convincing reason of substance to be upset about the Swedish request that the Council of the European Union endorse a Palestinian state with "East Jerusalem as its capital". Of course the wording of the resolution could and should be less hostile to Israel, e.g., by explicitly recognizing West Jerusalem as Israel's capital and doing more than merely "taking note" of Netanyahu's settlement freeze. But what can Netanyahu expect? Basically, the proposal reiterates known European and international positions.

New Construction in East Jerusalem: What It Really Means

By Orly Noy, Ir Amim Spokesperson

The recent diplomatic and journalistic storm over plans to expand the Gilo neighborhood in Jerusalem exposed a fundamental difference of view between Israel and many of its strongest supporters. Reacting to news that plans for 900 new dwellings in Gilo were to be approved by the Jerusalem Planning Committee, the White House was said to be "dismayed" by the move, and the UN General Secretary Ban-Ki Moon "deplored" it. The two statements, and others coming from Europe, insist that the status of Jerusalem should be resolved through negotiations between the parties, and that neither should take actions to pre-empt the outcome of such negotiations.