(HOST) After intense discussions this week in Washington, the latest dispute between the United States and Israel over new Israeli settlements in Arab East Jerusalem remains unresolved. However, commentator and veteran ABC News diplomatic correspondent Barrie Dunsmore tells us this morning that the differences go much deeper than settlements.
(DUNSMORE) One consequence of the end of the Cold War was that tens of thousands of Jewish émigrés left Soviet repression for the freedom of Israel. In general, this group has shown little tolerance for the Palestinians living for decades under Israeli military rule. And after the last Israeli election, the main Russian émigré party became a major bloc in the government headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – a coalition that makes hardliner Netanyahu seem almost moderate by comparison.
It was therefore no surprise that President Obama’s initial effort to restart the Middle East peace process immediately ran headlong into an intransigent Israel government, a significant part of which is strongly opposed to ever giving back any occupied Palestinian territory. When Obama called on the Israelis to freeze the construction of new Jewish settlements – settlements which threaten to preclude any future Israeli/Palestinian peace agreement – Netanyahu defiantly scoffed at the notion. That left Obama looking weak, both in Israel – and in the entire Middle East. It appeared not to dawn on Israel’s hardliners that humiliating their most important financial benefactor and their best diplomatic and military protector might not be in their country’s long-term interests.
Obama is the least popular American president in Israel – ever. His middle name, Hussein; his early years in Moslem Indonesia; and his Moslem-Kenyan father have apparently made Israelis suspicious. But as New Yorker editor David Remnick wrote this week, many of Obama’s early mentors and heavy contributors were Chicago Jews. Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod – the president’s chief of staff and his top political advisor – are both Jewish. Still, Netanyahu’s brother in law has called Obama an "anti-Semite" on Israeli radio, while Netenyahu himself is reported to have dismissed Emmanuel and Axelrod as "self hating Jews" – a report he denies.
In any event, Netanyahu has alienated two of Israel’s best American friends – Vice-President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But perhaps of even greater significance is a new attitude toward the Jewish state at the highest levels of the Pentagon, where top generals have concluded that the never-ending Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a strategic liability for America.
In testimony to Congress last week, General David Petreaus, the most influential general in the country, said the number one root cause of instability in his command – which includes the Middle East, West Asia and East Africa – was "…insufficient progress toward a comprehensive Middle East peace." Petreaus went on, "The conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel."
That analysis would account for what a major Israeli newspaper claims was Biden’s recent warning to Netanyahu, "This is starting to get dangerous for us," Biden is reported to have said. "What you’re doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan."
Such a sentiment could become a game-changer in U.S./Israeli relations.