BICOM

Jonathan Rynhold, Shusterman Visiting Professor of Israel Studies, in the Dept of Political Science at George Washington University assesses the prospects for U.S.-Israel relations following President Obama’s re-election.The Podcast can be listened to here.

We know President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu have not always seen eye to eye. Some are predicting fireworks in Obama’s second term. Do you think it’s really going to work out that way?

It is a mistake to put too much significance on the fact that the two leaders do not get on personally. There have been a lot of column inches written on clashes between Obama and Netanyahu, but fireworks are unlikely. One of the only issues where Obama admitted to making a mistake during his first term was on his position towards the Israeli-Arab conflict. The President acknowledged the peace process was more complicated than he thought. He originally sought to pressure Netanyahu over settlements — and whilst he was successful in this end, securing a ten month moratorium on settlement construction — he was not successful in delivering concession from Arab states or the Palestinians. This experience has made him much more cautious.

However, there is certainly a feeling among Democrats that Netanyahu intervened in the U.S. presidential campaign, so there may be pressure from some quarters of Obama’s party to take revenge. However, the President will most likely approach Israel’s general election with caution, as previous administrations that have attempted to intervene have not been successful. Moreover, intervening could backfire and cause problems for Obama down the line.

 

On the peace process, Obama seemed to come in all guns blazing at the beginning of his first term, reaching out to Abbas, appointing George Mitchell as envoy, piling pressure on Israel over settlements, and then declaring that 1967 lines plus agreed swaps should be the basis of a territorial negotiation. But it did not produce the desired results. How do you see a second term Obama administration addressing the peace process?

Obama’s top priorities will be domestic issues, and in particular the economy. When Obama turns to foreign policy, the priority issues on the Middle East will relate to Egypt, Syria and Iran. These issues are perceived as much more important than the peace process at the moment. The Obama administration will do everything it can to prevent the collapse of the Palestinian Authority, as Hamas is waiting in the wings. But apart from this the White House will wait to see if circumstances in the region change in such a way that makes progress in talks more likely.

 

On the question of Iran, the diplomacy has been on hold for the last few months whilst the election has been ongoing, though there were reports of secret contacts between Iran and the U.S. Netanyahu has defined a red line relating to Iranian production of 20% enriched uranium which we can expect to reach next summer, so time is tight. What do you expect to be the administration’s strategy to resolve this crisis?

The administration will make one last full-fledged attempt to resolve the crisis over Iran’s controversial nuclear programme diplomatically before the spring. The terms of the agreement Washington can offer will probably be acceptable for Israel, if not desirable, and could prevent the need for Israeli military action.

The question remains, however, if Iran will go for a diplomatic agreement. If they do not, it will put Obama in a much stronger position to use military force. Whereas in his first term everyone in Washington thought Obama would not use force, now in his second term it is thought, if Iran rejects diplomacy, the U.S. could use military force.

 

Looking more widely at the region, the Obama administration faces numerous challenges resulting from the Arab Spring, not least of which is what to do about the conflict in Syria, which has considerable wider implications. How do you think U.S. policy is going to shape up with regard to Syria and other areas of regional instability?

Obama will likely become more involved in Syria and supporting the opposition, but the situation is chaotic and the problem for the U.S. is finding an acceptable opposition group that it can confidently support to lead the opposition.

Israel’s borders with both Egypt and Syria, which were quiet for decades, are now more porous to terrorism. On Israel’s southern border with Egypt, terrorist groups are active and the ability of Cairo to control these groups is minimal, handing greater power to them. In the past if Israel was attacked from Gaza it responded in Gaza in order to restore deterrence. Now Israel has to consider the impact on relations with Egypt, so it has to be more careful.

Before the situation was managed by Cairo and Jerusalem, but now America has a more important role to play in influencing the regime in Egypt, and one cannot simply assume the same level of stability seen in the past. On both Israel’s northern and southern borders the situation can quickly escalate and Israel’s ability to respond has become more complicated. Washington has to understand this issue and be more active to maintain stability in the region.

 

There is some speculation that the result of the U.S. elections could impact Israel’s own election, with an Obama win potentially harming Netanyahu’s chances, and encouraging centre-left figures in Israel. Do you think that’s the case, and do you think the U.S. will try, in any way to influence Israel’s elections?

It would be a serious mistake to think an Obama victory will have a major influence on Israeli elections. It may cause former-prime minister Ehud Olmert and former-foreign minister Tzipi Livni to run as they think it is significant, but all the polling from Israel shows that on peace and security Israelis support Netanyahu. It would be a mistake for Obama to get involved in Israeli elections. There may be opportunities for the left and centre to push on the social economic agenda, and to take advantage of Likud’s new alliance with Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu list to undermine Netanyahu’s claim to be centrist. But an attempt by the left or the centre-left to argue that Netanyahu will cause serious damage to U.S.-Israel relations would be a serious mistake. Every time there has been a clash between Obama and Netanyahu the Israeli public has sided with Netanyahu. The only person who can make this an issue is Netanyahu himself, if he decides to confront the U.S. during his election campaign, which would most likely back fire.