Coffee Brown, University of New Mexico, Talk Radio News
The Council on Foreign Relations hosted a conversation between Former National Security Adviser of Middle East Affairs Elliott Abrams, and senior fellow of the Middle Eastern Studies Council on Foreign Relations and Foreign Affairs Editor Jim Hoge to discuss the meeting between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu Wednesday.
Abrams believes the stakes are higher for Netanyahu than for Obama because the U.S. is such a crucial ally, and because Obama seems not to emphasize interpersonal rapport in his decision-making as much as Bush has.
Hoge concurred, “As I recall from the campaign, he did make a point that foreign policy should not be to personally oriented, that it has to be based on interests and strategies that one is following. One comment he made when he met Netanyahu the first time is, ‘You’re coming from the right, I’m coming from the left, but we’re both pragmatists.’”
“Bibi (Netanyahu) has chosen to make the Iran nuclear program an almost all or nothing issue,” Hoge said. For Barack, “getting the peace process started and making some progress is the centerpiece of his whole strategy,” he finished.
“I think they’re going to have to agree to disagree,” Abrams said. He believes that Israel won’t cede any control or territory so long as they feel that Iran might take advantage of such concessions. Abrams doesn’t believe Israel will try to impede any negotiations with Iran, because time is on the side of Iranian nuclear development. Instead, Israel will want what they believe to be a futile process to play out as quickly as possible, so that the U.S. and other nations will move toward sanctions, he predicts.
Hoge said that Netanyahu is temporizing about a two-state solution, and Abrams agreed, saying Palestine won’t be ready until it can unify it’s factions and control acts of terrorism.
Abrams cited a frank commitment to a two-state solution by former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that Netanyahu could use to justify his own support, should he choose to give it.
If Iran elects a new president, Israel may have to wait while other nations give the new leader the benefit of doubt, but Obama has said that if negotiations fail, he is prepared to move to “crippling sanctions,” according to Abrams.
Hoge mentioned an explicit threat by Israel to strike nuclear facilities within Iran and Abrams said that threat should be taken seriously. Israel, he pointed out, “is a one-bomb country” which Iran has already called “a cancerous tumor.”
“Can our attitude make a difference in Iran?” Hoge asked.
Maybe, Abrams replies, “The regime is not that popular, 70 percent of the population is under the age of 30. They seem to want blue jeans more than the denunciation of the U.S. But hatred of the U.S. and of Israel and the oppression of women are the three pillars of this regime.” So it can’t afford to lose one by warming toward America.
The Geometry Of Hatred
The Council on Foreign Relations hosted a conversation between Former National Security Adviser of Middle East Affairs Elliott Abrams, and senior fellow of the Middle Eastern Studies Council on Foreign Relations and Foreign Affairs Editor Jim Hoge to discuss the meeting between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu Wednesday.
Abrams believes the stakes are higher for Netanyahu than for Obama because the U.S. is such a crucial ally, and because Obama seems not to emphasize interpersonal rapport in his decision-making as much as Bush has.
Hoge concurred, “As I recall from the campaign, he did make a point that foreign policy should not be to personally oriented, that it has to be based on interests and strategies that one is following. One comment he made when he met Netanyahu the first time is, ‘You’re coming from the right, I’m coming from the left, but we’re both pragmatists.’”
“Bibi (Netanyahu) has chosen to make the Iran nuclear program an almost all or nothing issue,” Hoge said. For Barack, “getting the peace process started and making some progress is the centerpiece of his whole strategy,” he finished.
“I think they’re going to have to agree to disagree,” Abrams said. He believes that Israel won’t cede any control or territory so long as they feel that Iran might take advantage of such concessions. Abrams doesn’t believe Israel will try to impede any negotiations with Iran, because time is on the side of Iranian nuclear development. Instead, Israel will want what they believe to be a futile process to play out as quickly as possible, so that the U.S. and other nations will move toward sanctions, he predicts.
Hoge said that Netanyahu is temporizing about a two-state solution, and Abrams agreed, saying Palestine won’t be ready until it can unify it’s factions and control acts of terrorism.
Abrams cited a frank commitment to a two-state solution by former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that Netanyahu could use to justify his own support, should he choose to give it.
If Iran elects a new president, Israel may have to wait while other nations give the new leader the benefit of doubt, but Obama has said that if negotiations fail, he is prepared to move to “crippling sanctions,” according to Abrams.
Hoge mentioned an explicit threat by Israel to strike nuclear facilities within Iran and Abrams said that threat should be taken seriously. Israel, he pointed out, “is a one-bomb country” which Iran has already called “a cancerous tumor.”
“Can our attitude make a difference in Iran?” Hoge asked.
Maybe, Abrams replies, “The regime is not that popular, 70 percent of the population is under the age of 30. They seem to want blue jeans more than the denunciation of the U.S. But hatred of the U.S. and of Israel and the oppression of women are the three pillars of this regime.” So it can’t afford to lose one by warming toward America.