What Isolation?

Michael Oren in The Washington Post:

Is Israel really more isolated now than in the past?

Isolation, of course, is not automatically symptomatic of bad policies. Britain was isolated fighting the Nazis at the start of World War II. Union forces were isolated early in the Civil War, as was the Continental Army at Valley Forge. “It is better to be alone than in bad company,” wrote the young George Washington. That maxim is especially apt for the Middle East today, where one of the least-isolated states, backed by both Iran and Iraq and effectively immune to United Nations sanctions, is Syria.

Israel, in fact, is significantly less isolated than at many times in its history. Before the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel faced a belligerent Egypt and Jordan and a hostile Soviet bloc, Greece, India and China — all without strategic ties with the United States. Today, Israel has peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan; excellent relations with the nations of Eastern Europe as well as Greece, India and China; and an unbreakable alliance with America. Many democracies, including Canada, Italy and the Czech Republic, stand staunchly with us. Israel has more legations abroad than ever before and recently joined the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which comprises the most globally integrated countries. Indeed, Egypt and Germany mediated the upcoming release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who had been held hostage by Hamas for five years.

Israel is not responsible for the upheavals in the Arab world or for the lack of freedom that triggered them. Israelis did not elect Turkey’s Islamic-minded government or urge Syria’s army to fire on its citizens. Conversely, no change in Israeli policies can alter the historic processes transforming the region. Still, some commentators claim that, by refusing to freeze settlement construction on the West Bank and insisting on defensible borders and security guarantees, Israel isolates itself.

The settlements are not the core of the conflict. Arabs attacked us for 50 years before the first settlements were built. Netanyahu froze new construction in the settlements for an unprecedented 10 months, and still the Palestinians refused to negotiate. Settlements are not the reason that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signed a unity pact with Hamas in May, or why, in his address to the U.N. General Assembly last month, Abbas denied the Jews’ 4,000-year connection to our homeland. As Abbas wrote in the New York Times in May, the Palestinian attempt to declare a state without making peace with Israel was about “internationalization of the conflict . . . to pursue claims against Israel” in the United Nations, not about settlements.

As for borders and security, Israel’s position reflects the 2005 withdrawal from Gaza. After uprooting all our settlements, we received not peace but thousands of Hamas rockets fired at our civilians. In Lebanon, a U.N. peace force watched while Hezbollah amassed an arsenal of 50,000 missiles. Israel’s need for defensible borders and for a long-term Israeli army presence to prevent arms smuggling into any Palestinian state is, for us, a life-and-death issue. Moreover, in a rapidly changing Middle East, we need assurances of our ability to defend ourselves if the Palestinians who support peace are overthrown by those opposed to it.

Despite repeated Palestinian efforts to isolate us, Israel is not alone. And we have a great many friends, especially in the United States, who we know would not want to imply that Israel stands alone in a dangerous region. Prime Minister Netanyahu remains committed to resuming peace talks with the Palestinians anywhere, any time, without preconditions, while insisting on the security arrangements vital to Israel’s survival. Meanwhile, we will continue to stretch out our hand for peace to all Middle Eastern peoples. To paraphrase one of George Washington’s contemporaries — if that be isolation, make the most of it.

The writer is Israel’s ambassador to the United States.

The real reason why Israel is isolated

From The Jewish Week:

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta was quite right to observe this week that Israel is becoming increasingly isolated in the Mideast. What’s unnerving, though, is to suggest, as he did, that Jerusalem is at fault for this situation.

“Real security can only be achieved by both a strong diplomatic effort as well as a strong effort to project your military strength,” Panetta said en route to the region for the umpteenth U.S. effort to restart peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

We appreciate and support Washington’s attempts to get the negotiations on track. The current urgency is driven by the Palestinian Authority’s end-around diplomacy at the United Nations in its quest for statehood by avoiding rather than dealing with Israel. But a reality check is in order, and it indicates that Jerusalem is not the culprit here. Far from it.

In truth, Israel has accepted the Quartet’s invitation to come back to the table, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said repeatedly that he is ready to sit down and negotiate with PA President Mahmoud Abbas immediately.

It is Abbas who is holding back, as usual, insisting that Israel first must agree to a moratorium on settlement building. Netanyahu’s response is, in effect, “been there, done that.” He points out that at some internal political risk, the Jerusalem government declared a 10-month halt to building in the West Bank, but the Palestinians dragged their feet for nine months and the talks ended after two weeks.

We would prefer that Netanyahu issue another short-term moratorium on West Bank building — if for no other reason than tactical. Such a move might score a few diplomatic points with Washington and a few other countries. More importantly, though, it would reveal that the sticking point for the Palestinians is not the settlements. After all, the PA negotiated off and on with Jerusalem for many years without raising the issue, and only made it a deal-breaker after President Barack Obama did.

Rather, the critical considerations for the leaders of the PA, as Abbas noted in his UN speech last month, are that they believe the “occupation” goes back to the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, not 1967, and their refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state or compromise on the “right of return.”

In all the calls for a Palestinian state, how many have noted that it would have racist, apartheid laws — no Jews allowed — and follow Islamic dictates? Not to mention that the PA is financially broke, has deep divisions with Hamas in Gaza and can’t control militants without the help of the Israeli army.

Yes, Israel finds itself isolated in the region. That’s because Turkey has cast its fate with Iran rather than the West and has been looking for fights to pick with Jerusalem to bolster its status in Tehran. It’s because Egypt, without Mubarak, has made it clear that it wants to pull back the relationship. Israel displayed great restraint in the face of border attacks and having its embassy in Cairo attacked by a lynch mob.

Yet Jerusalem is somehow perceived as causing rather than enduring increasing hostility and snubs from its neighbors.

Are the West Bank settlements really to blame here rather than decades of virulent Arab anti-Semitism and refusal to accept the reality of a Jewish presence in the region?

Panetta's Pointless Warning to Israel

Jonothan S. Tobin of Commentary Magazine:

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned Israel yesterday that its increasing isolation in the region means it must take “risks for peace.” This shot fired over the bow of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was made in comments to reporters traveling with Panetta, who is on his first trip to the Jewish state since assuming the leadership of the Pentagon.

But it is not likely to make much of an impression with the Israeli people for the simple reason that, unlike either the Obama administration and the international press corps, they understand Israel has been taking risks for peace for 18 years. Panetta’s statement, like so much of the rhetoric that has come out of the administration, seems to reflect a mindset that treats the events of the last 18 years as meaningless.

After the Oslo Accords, the peace offers that both Yasir Arafat​ and Mahmoud Abbas rejected and the withdrawal from Gaza that turned that area into a terrorist state, how can any American speak as if Israel has stood pat all this time rather than, as the historical record proves, taken terrible risks for which it has gotten little reward?

The Panetta visit is meant to reassure the Israelis who are understandably worried about the way in which the Arab Spring has led to more hate for the Jewish state rather than democracy for the Arabs. It is an unfortunate fact that there is nothing Israel can do to repair relations with countries like Turkey and Egypt, whose governments are whipping up antagonism for reasons that have little to do with the policies of the Netanyahu government. As dangerous as this is, it is the helplessness of the United States in the face of these trends that is most troubling.

President Obama came into office hoping to curry favor with the Arab and Muslim world by distancing the United States from Israel. While that policy shift helped fuel Palestinian intransigence and doomed the already slim hopes for Middle East peace, it did nothing to make America loved. But as the situation in the region deteriorates, Obama still has no answers other than to blame Israel and to demand it take “risks.”

While it is to be hoped Panetta will reaffirm the U.S. security cooperation with Israel that has survived Obama’s predilection for picking fights with Netanyahu, there is reason to worry the administration is looking to set the stage for a new round of pressure on the prime minister. Despite the pledges that the United States will work to preserve Israel’s military edge over its hostile neighbors, the timing of the visit may mean Washington is looking to demand payment for its veto of Palestinian independence at the United Nations.

But even if Netanyahu were to make the concessions on settlements and Jerusalem that Obama wants, there is little reason to believe the Palestinian Authority is interested in signing any peace deal. Rather than muscling Israel, the administration needs to make it clear to the Palestinian Authority, whom Panetta is said to be hoping to “re-engage,” that they cannot continue to be the beneficiaries of American largesse while at the same time doing everything in their power to torpedo the peace process.

Weakening Israel or creating the impression the United States is seeking to undermine its government only makes it less likely the Palestinians and other nations in the region will work for peace. By arriving in the region demanding Israel take “risks” they have already undertaken, rather than making it clear to the PA they will get nothing from their refusal to talk, Panetta has only ensured the standoff will continue.

Not all was bad though.  Panetta reaffirmed the U.S.' committment to a secure Israel and a stable country in the everchanging Middle East.

The most important thing I bring with me is the continuing commitment to the security of Israel. We have been strong allies, we have been strong partners. We have always made a commitment to do everything we can to support the security of Israel and as the Secretary of Defense, I intend to continue that commitment. I think it's important for us to say to this region that when it comes to the difficult issues we face we stand together to try to confront our difficult and common challenges.