Netanyahu row with Obama administration deepens

lily wrote:Palestine deserves to be given state status, LL.

lily wrote:Palestine deserves to be given state status, LL.

bb1 wrote:

lily wrote:Palestine deserves to be given state status, LL.

I don't even know how there can be an argument about that, Lily. Look at any old map; that area has always been Palestine.

.... series of hard-line positions that will put him at odds with the international community.

In a dramatic policy reversal, he said he now opposes the creation of a Palestinian state — a key policy goal of the White House and the international community. He also promised to expand construction in Jewish areas of east Jerusalem, the section of the city claimed by the Palestinians as their capital.

He (Netanyahu)  also railed against Israeli Arabs, The New York Times noted, for having the temerity to vote.

Zionist Camp Chairman Itzhak Herzog will receive the support of the joint Arab party, which has finally decided to recommend him to the President.

Following the elections in Israel, the president meets with the heads of every faction that had made it into parliament, to ask them whom they recommend to take on the task of cobbling a new coalition givernment.

The law does not require that the candidate represent the largest party, he or she only have to have been elected to the Knesset.

Back in October 2010, the Kadima party under Tzipi Livni’s leadership received 28 seats in the elections to become the largest faction in the Knesset. But the right-wing bloc with the religious parties comprised 65 MKs, with the Likud showing with 27 seats. Ten days after the election, President Shimon Peres instructed Benjamin Netanyahu, who had been recommended by those 65 MKs to build the next coalition. Livni and Kadima, with their 28 seats, remained in the opposition.

Some polls predicted that the United Arab List would receive as many as 15 seats this time around, compared with the 11 seats the three partners making up the list had in the last Knesset. The main reason for the forging of this new, larger Arab party, had to do with the new law instituting a blocking percentage on candidates entering the Knesset.

A party has to have 3.8 seats in order to qualify, meaning, in most cases, if you received fewer than 4 seats, you lost all your votes. The three Arab parties had traditionally hovered around the 3-4 seats, and would have been destined to disappear had they not formed their alliance.

Ironically, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, whose Knesset faction passed the new law, is himself facing elimination, with some polls showing his party failing to pass the blocking percentage it legislated.

Itzhak Herzog pointed said this morning that “these elections are a chance to decide between the path of despair and failure of Bibi and the way of change and hope which I will mark as prime minister. I need your vote to be able to form a strong, stable, socially responsible government, that will really usher in the change we all hope for.”

NY Times lashes out at surprise Netanyahu win

Only hours after the surprise Likud victory, following weeks of polls showing the party would lose by as many as five mandates, the American media began its harsh critique of the will of the Israeli people, and especially of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In one New York Times op-ed, titled "Deep Wounds and Lingering Questions After Israel’s Bitter Race," Isabel Kershner wrote that the Netanyahu's win was "the result of an increasingly shrill campaign that raised questions about his ability to heal Israel’s internal wounds or better its standing in the world."

"Even while his critics said Mr. Netanyahu had reaffirmed his reputation as a cynical, calculating politician, it appeared that his approach succeeded in drawing votes from other right-leaning parties," referring to the prime minister's brash statements regarding the formation a Palestinian state, as well as the increase in Arab voters showing up to the polls.

Kershner harpooned Netanyahu's speech to the US Congress  on March 3 by saying that "he angered the president of the United States with a speech to Congress and infuriated European leaders eager to see the peace process move ahead to create a Palestinian state."

Meanwhile, on news portal The Daily Beast, Jonathan Alter called Netanyahu desperate and warned of harsh consequences as a result of the win

"A reckoning is coming — faster than expected — for Netanyahu, his Likud Party and maybe even for the State of Israel itself," he wrote in a piece titled "Bibi’s Ugly Win Will Harm Israel."

"Instead of trying to hide his desperation, he flaunted (or contrived) it, to great political effect, winning by several seats more than expected."

Alter further warned that the Netanyahu's win would only serve to legitimize anti-Israel movements abroad. "[T]he 'BDS' movement (Boycotts, Divestment, Sanctions) will likely move from the (sometimes anti-Semitic) fringe closer to the center of the debate on college campuses and in international forums."

"Beset by European boycotts, rebuked by international tribunals, estranged from the president of the United States—it’s not a pretty picture of the fate of America’s closest ally in the region."

Bibi’s Ugly Win Will Harm Israel
A desperate Netanyahu used fear to grab the most seats in the election, but his rejection of a Palestinian state will further isolate the Jewish state.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu won a big election Tuesday, but he won ugly by staking out a new position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is likely to harm his nation in the months ahead.

A reckoning is coming—faster than expected—for Netanyahu, his Likud Party and maybe even for the State of Israel itself.

Complete returns showed that Netanyahu’s Likud Party won 29 seats in the Knesset to 24 seats for the Zionist Union (formerly Labor) Party headed by Isaac Herzog, who ran a more spirited campaign than expected but almost certainly fell short of the support necessary to form a government.

Israel’s president, Reuven Rivlin, whose job consists mostly of presiding over elections, said not long after the polls closed that he wants a coalition government and has given Netanyahu, Herzog and the other party leaders a couple of days to engage in a frenzy of (largely unconsummated) deal-making. But Herzog’s parliamentary math problem got worse as the evening wore on, and it’s hard to see where he finds the “mandates” (seats) to prevail.

Beset by European boycotts, rebuked by international tribunals, estranged from the president of the United States—it’s not a pretty picture.

One big surprise was the performance of the Joint List, a coalition of usually fractious Arab parties that won 13 seats and finished third, far better than Arab Israelis ever have in the past. But their influence will be limited because Arab parties traditionally refuse to join the government so as to avoid being complicit in official Israeli policy that they loathe.

As the returns came in, the center-left and other critics of Netanyahu held out hope that Moshe Kahlon—whose center-right Kulanu Party won 10 seats—would nurse his anger at Netanyahu (in whose government he once served) and side with Zionist Union. But even that would be unlikely to yield enough seats to oust Netanyahu. The small religious parties that often hold the balance of power faded amid Bibi’s last-minute panicky bid for right-wing votes.

That panic had a purpose. Netanyahu came back from the dead by doing something politicians almost never do—predicting his own defeat. He told base voters that he would lose if they didn’t abandon far-right-winger Naftali Bennett’s Habayit Hayeudi Party and flock back to Likud. Instead of trying to hide his desperation, he flaunted (or contrived) it, to great political effect, winning by several seats more than expected.  

Like George W. Bush in his 2004 reelection campaign against John Kerry in the aftermath of 9/11, Netanyahu wielded security issues as a polarizing political weapon, overcoming personal unpopularity and a mediocre economic record with a campaign based largely on fear. It worked.    

But at what cost? In the days before the election, Netanyahu accused the opposition of being manipulated by Americans, insulted Arabs for simply voting, doubled down on support for settlements in East Jerusalem and—most significantly—said there would be no Palestinian state on his watch, thereby confirming a view that critics always suspected he harbored.  

Cynical about their politicians, some Israeli pundits predicted that Netanyahu would slip away from his new line, just as he this week repudiated his famous 2009 speech at Bar Ilan University in which he proclaimed, “Let us make peace,” and endorsed a two-state solution.

Bibi can try, but Monday’s comment set his feet in cement. “I think that anyone who moves to establish a Palestinian state and evacuate territory gives territory away to radical Islamist attacks against Israel,” Netanyahu told a website owned by his most generous supporter, American casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson. Should he go back on this pledge, his right-wing supporters would desert him and he would be forced to call another election next year that he would likely lose.

Netanyahu knows that intransigence on the Palestinians is harmful to his purported security priority—confronting a nuclear Iran. He knows that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, and other countries can’t ally with Israel against Iran until he makes peace with the Palestinians. But he was willing to do what it takes to win.

Now the rest of the world will do what it takes to punish his government. That means that the “BDS” movement (Boycotts, Divestment, Sanctions) will likely move from the (sometimes anti-Semitic) fringe closer to the center of the debate on college campuses and in international forums. As the Palestinians pursue their case globally with more finesse than they once had, the Israeli policy—shorn of efforts to achieve peace—will look increasingly illegitimate.

And Bibi and Likud might be in for a rude shock at the United Nations. On Tuesday, moderate Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told CNN that it was “hard to imagine” there would be no consequences from Netanyahu’s new one-state views.  

Bibi has placed all his chips on the Republican Congress, which has no say over how the U.S. votes in the U.N. Schiff—who often reflects the view of the White House—hinted that the Obama administration might consider selectively lifting the American veto in the Security Council that has protected Israel for more than six decades.

While the U.S. will no doubt continue to veto the most obnoxious U.N. resolutions, others (like those based on comments of U.S. officials about the need for a two-state solution) are now more likely to pass with the tacit support of the U.S., opening a new chapter in international pressure on Israel.

Beset by European boycotts, rebuked by international tribunals, estranged from the president of the United States—it’s not a pretty picture of the fate of America’s closest ally in the region.

But that might be the fallout from the most bruising and consequential Israeli election in many years.

Israeli society now looks to be split down the middle?

BBC News 23 March 2015
From the section Middle East

Benjamin Netanyahu posted a video message on Facebook saying Arab voters were "voting in droves"

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he "regrets" warning "the Arabs are voting in droves" during last week's elections.

He said he had not meant to offend Israeli Arab voters.

In a Facebook message directed at supporters on election day, he warned that "right-wing rule is in danger" as left-wing organisations were bringing Arabs to vote "in buses".

The Joint List alliance of Arab-dominated parties rejected the apology.

The prime minister had feared his voters would stay at home, but won against expectations.

Mr Netanyahu now says he hopes to form a new governing coalition within two or three weeks.

Apologising for his comments he said: "I know the things I said a few days ago hurt some Israeli citizens.

"My actions as prime minister, including massive investment in minority sectors, prove the exact opposite.

"I think, similarly, that no element outside the state of Israel should intervene in our democratic processes."

'Cannot pretend'

Ayman Odeh, leader of the Joint Arab List - an alliance of Israeli Arab-dominated parties that united for the first time and secured 13 seats at last week's election, told Israel's Channel 10: "We do not accept this apology.

"It was to a group of elders and not to the elected leadership of Israel's Arabs. I want to see actions, how is he going to manifest this apology? Will he advance equality?"

Mr Netanyahu's comments on election day drew criticism from the White House, which said it was "deeply concerned" by "divisive rhetoric" that sought to marginalise Israeli Arabs.

Ahead of the vote, Mr Netanyahu also said he would not allow the creation of a Palestinian state if re-elected.

His centre-left opposition, the Zionist Union, had promised to repair ties with the Palestinians and the international community.

Mr Netanyahu has since watered down this position in an interview with MSNBC.

But White House adviser Denis McDonough said on Monday that "we cannot pretend that these comments were never made."

Israeli Arabs, descendants of the 160,000 Palestinians who remained after the State of Israel was created in 1948, represent about 20% the Israeli population.