BICOM

Key points

• Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu has enjoyed a year of stability, and claims achievements in economy, security and public policy. However, the achievements highlighted by the government are overshadowed by strained relations with the US, the stall in the peace process, and lack of clear progress on the issue of Iran.
• Despite the positive steps Netanyahu points to on the Palestinian front, including his support for a Palestinian state, questions are still being asked about Netanyahu’s intentions, internally as well as internationally.
• Whilst public support for Netanyahu remains relatively stable, commentators across the Israeli spectrum have challenged the Prime Minister for not being clear about his direction. On the left they fear he lacks serious intent in the peace process, on the right they fear he will ‘sell them out’.
• From both left and right of the Israeli political spectrum it is anticipated that in the coming year, Netanyahu will have to confront the bigger issues.

Introduction

Last week Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presented his government’s achievements to the Israeli public as he marked a year since being sworn into office. Commentators in Israel point to the government’s mixed record from the last twelve months. Netanyahu is credited for his stewardship of the economy during the global downturn, and for presiding over a period of relative calm on Israel’s most sensitive borders with Gaza and Lebanon. His coalition and his poll ratings have remained stable. But despite personal movement in terms of his approach to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, his first year has been overshadowed by the diplomatic stalemate with the Palestinians, strained relations with the US administration, and the ongoing threat from Iran, which he has named as his top priority. This analysis looks at some of the questions being asked about Netanyahu within Israel, one year into his term.

A year of survival

Whilst Netanyahu claims achievements on the domestic front, he has been criticised in the Israeli press for procrastinating on major issues of national strategic importance. His critics in Israel note that he has not, so far, dealt with the country’s most pressing priorities as he himself perceives them. For two years prior to becoming prime minister, Netanyahu projected an image of himself as the country’s only leader capable of handling Israel’s security challenges and in particular the Iranian issue. But whilst Israel has enjoyed a year of quiet on the security front, the threat from Tehran continues to hang over Israel. Furthermore, the peace process with the Palestinians is at a stalemate. As well as the tensions with Washington, Netanyahu has also presided over crises in other key diplomatic relationships, including with Turkey and Jordan.

The perception in Israel of Netanyahu lacking clear direction has tied in with ongoing reports, since the government’s formation, of disarray within his private office. This includes reports of personal rivalries between his most senior political, military and communications aides, including his national security adviser Uzi Arad and spokesman Nir Hefetz.

Nonetheless, public support for Netanyahu remains reasonably stable, though there are indications of a marginal decline beginning in the last few weeks. Whilst polls indicate the Israeli public divided over the dispute with the US, the issue is yet to generate a significant turn of public opinion against the government. For many commentators therefore, it is Netanyahu’s political survival, one year into his term, which has been his most impressive accomplishment.

Internal constraints within the Palestinians arena, and the refusal of the PA to enter into negotiations with Israel over the last year, have inadvertently contributed to the present Israeli coalition’s stability. Because of the lack of peace talks, ideological rifts within the coalition, which comprises religious and secular right wing factions and Labour, have not been exposed. This has enabled Netanyahu to show significant rhetorical movement on a two state solution without actually being forced to confront difficult decisions in the peace process.

Movement but no progress

Expectations for progress on the Israeli-Palestinian front were low when Netanyahu came to power. This was partly due to Netanyahu’s own political record, but also because of the broader regional conditions he inherited. In particular, the deep political divisions between Fatah and Hamas that have split the Palestinian territories, and severely complicated the Israeli-Palestinian track.

Even so, Netanyahu’s speech at Bar Ilan University last June demonstrated real political movement on his part. It was highly significant for the leader of Likud to talk in the language of ‘two states for two nations’. He was also able to claim a ‘national consensus’ for this position, effectively shifting the debate within Israel to an examination of what two future states should look like and how they can coexist securely.

Netanyahu has also imposed a politically risky ten-month moratorium on new construction in West Bank settlements. Whilst insufficient in the eyes of the Palestinian leadership, implementation of this policy generated widespread protests by Israeli settlers and right-wing activists late last year. Finally, as Netanyahu reminded journalists last week, he has increased the dismantling of barriers in the West Bank to ease access for Palestinian and facilitate economic growth.

Still, these moves have not been sufficient to bring the Palestinians back to the table or strengthen relations with the US. Netanyahu himself feels disappointed that his positive gestures on the peace process have not earned international recognition. He believes the Palestinian leadership do not want to engage in the peace process.

The challenge ahead

A key question to have emerged in Israeli public debate, therefore, is how Netanyahu is going to translate the movement he has shown on the Palestinian front into lasting outcomes. Even though he claims that his goal is to reach an agreement, his intentions are questioned, not only internationally but within Israel, both on the right and on the left. This is why Haaretz’s Aluf Benn argues that Netanyahu has reached “the moment of truth”, where he must choose between his ideological beliefs and political cooperation with the Israeli right on one hand, and American and international backing on the other.

Many on the left were convinced, even before Netanyahu entered office, that he is either personally unwilling or politically unable to make these choices. On the flipside, there are plenty on the right who feel that his acceptance of a Palestinian state and settlements freeze are evidence of his intention to “sell them out”. Likud loyalists fear that Netanyahu will follow in the footsteps of former prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert, who abandoned their party in 2005 to promote a more centrist agenda.

The settlement moratorium is liable to bring these issues to the surface when it is due to expire in September. There will be a crisis with Washington if the freeze is ended as planned, or with the Israeli settler community if it is extended. As a hawkish observer in the Israeli daily newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth put it, “people [on the right] are openly betting that the ten month freeze in Judea and Samaria [West Bank] settlements will be extended and even made permanent.” If the coalition is still intact, bridging this issue will pose a considerable challenge.

There is increasing conjecture about a new coalition pact at some stage being formed between Likud and the centrist Kadima party, in place of the right wing Yisrael Beiteinu, Shas and Habayit Hayehudi factions. In assessing how Netanyahu may act on the diplomatic front during his second year, a key litmus test for many Israeli observers is whether he reaches out to Kadima leader Tzipi Livni to form a new coalition. 

There is considerable public support for a Kadima-Likud-Labour coalition. Should Netanyahu decide to drop the right-wing coalition members and bring Kadima in, Livni will come under very heavy pressure from within her own faction to join.  Livni stated her position in the Israeli press over the weekend.  She conditioned joining the government on the Prime Minister committing fully to the peace process, in particular by dropping the coalition partners that do not support it.

Whatever Netanyahu’s intentions, progress on the peace process also depends on the Palestinians. Netanyahu believes they are not interested in resuming peace talks. From the Israeli government’s perspective, the PA’s ongoing refusal to negotiate provides more than enough justification not to extend the freeze when it expires in September. However, Netanyahu will be hard pressed to convince the international community of this.

Conclusion

Netanyahu has survived his first year in office and kept his coalition stable. He has shown real movement by accepting the principle of a Palestinian state, creating the basis for a negotiating framework. However, even though he has clearly stated his wish to begin full peace talks, there remains uncertainty within Israel, as well as internationally, as to his intentions. Not until he is tested will it be possible to know how far he is willing to go.

The Israeli prime minister undoubtedly faces a difficult road ahead domestically on a range of diplomatic issues. The sense in the Israeli debate is that perhaps only ‘a man of the right’ can achieve a final status deal, but that he must decide in which direction he wants to take his government. To confront the domestic political challenges Netanyahu will need solid international backing, including an unequivocal commitment to Israel as a Jewish state and the necessary security guarantees for the creation of a Palestinian state. It will also require international pressure on the Palestinian leadership to meet Israel in renewed negotiations.