Leave it to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA). With
President Barack Obama expected to deliver a major speech outlining a new (or,
at least, revised) Middle East peace strategy soon, Cantor decided it was time
to invite Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to deliver a speech before
a joint session of Congress.
This is one of the benefits of having a Republican House at
the same time that a Likud prime minister is in office in Israel. The two
right-wing parties can work together to thwart any Democratic president's
attempt to advance U.S. national security by brokering Middle East peace.
The last time this happened was in the 1990s, when Bill
Clinton was president, Newt Gingrich was speaker, and the self-same Netanyahu
was Israel's prime minister. Netanyahu, joyously anticipating Clinton's defeat
for a second term, worked with the Republicans to subvert Clinton. Douglas
Bloomfield, AIPAC's long-time legislative director, recalled:
No Israeli leader was as adept at
playing partisan American politics, nor as disruptive as the American-educated
Netanyahu, who understood the politics of divided government. Even before becoming
prime minister, he joined forces with Gingrich against common enemies:
then-President Bill Clinton, Rabin and the Oslo peace process. Their goal was
to make sure all three failed.
Gingrich was happy to play this game with Netanyahu, but he is
more than matched by Cantor, who is not only a pro-Likud zealot but has also
publicly admitted that he would use his position to help Netanyahu withstand
any pressure from his own President.
Back in November, just after the Republicans won majority
control of the House, Cantor made clear that, in any arguments between Obama
and Netanyahu, he would be there for the prime minister. In a statement
issued by his office following a meeting with Netanyahu, Cantor made his position
clear:
Eric stressed that the new
Republican majority will serve as a check on the Administration and what has
been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington.
Reporting on the Cantor statement, Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) correspondent Ron Kampeas wrote,
"I can't remember an opposition leader telling a foreign leader, in a personal
meeting, that he would side, as a policy, with that leader against the
president."
So it is not surprising that, according to Haaretz, the Republicans have invited Netanyahu
to the Capitol to "counter a speech
expected to deal with U.S. Mideast policy by President Barack Obama."
Not surprising, but utterly unseemly. And there is nothing
"pro-Israel" about it.
Israel today is in the worst geostrategic position it has
been in for decades. The collapse of the Mubarak government has put the
Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty (which has saved countless lives) in jeopardy. The
Assad regime in Syria — no friend of Israel, but a reliable enforcer of de
facto peace on the border — is under popular assault and is unlikely to survive
for long. Lebanon is now run by Hezbollah. The Jordanian regime is shaky, like
most of the monarchies in the region. And Turkey, Israel's one powerful Muslim
ally, a strong friend of Israel since its birth, is so disgusted by Israel's
treatment of the Palestinians that it is distancing itself as fast as it can.
And then there's Iran.
That is the status quo, and it certainly doesn't favor
Israel. In fact, it is so bad that if anyone had predicted it a few years ago,
even a few months ago, he would have been dismissed as utterly out of touch.
But that's the reality.
Nonetheless, Binyamin Netanyahu makes no attempt to alter
the situation by pursuing an agreement with the Palestinians. Rather, he works
with all his might to preserve a status quo which, although terrible for his
country, keeps him in power. After all, as his apologists are quick to say,
freezing settlements to advance negotiations would weaken his coalition, and he
can't allow that to happen.
This is not to say that achieving a negotiated agreement
with the Palestinians would eliminate all of Israel's problems — problems which
threaten its very survival. But it would eliminate most of them, simply
because, as the late Yitzhak Rabin pointed out, it would eliminate Israel's
enemies' pretext for war. Once an agreement is reached (one that provides for a
viable Palestinian state alongside a secure Israel) no wars can be launched on
the Palestinians' behalf. Even Iran and Hezbollah would be neutralized by peace
as they cannot be by war.
Is it possible that those like Cantor, who would thwart U.S.
efforts to achieve peace, don't know this? Yes, it is. Ideologues — and Cantor
is a Likud ideologue — are often blind to facts that are obvious to others.
As for the lobby and its congressional acolytes, including
Cantor, of course, they benefit from the status quo. An ugly status quo may be
terrible for Israel and the Palestinians, but it is a great tool for
fundraising. (A few weeks ago, AIPAC responded to a terror attack by
immediately sending out an e-mail urging those outraged by the killing to send
money to AIPAC.) Prime Minister Netanyahu will almost certainly say
nothing worthwhile in his speech to Congress, but the photo ops with the prime
minister of Israel will show up in dozens of congressional fundraising appeals.
It's just politics. It's a game, and — as with most issues
these days — it's mostly about money.
No wonder President Obama seems so reluctant to get
involved. Any effort he makes will, by definition, be designed to change the
status quo. And that means that any effort he makes will make those who benefit
from it unhappy.
Nonetheless, the president should lay a plan on the table. It
is true that, until now, Netanyahu and his cheering section here have treated
Obama's ideas with contempt. But the fact is, whether Eric Cantor understands
it or not, the objective situation has changed.
Israel's regional situation is worse than ever. And, unless
there is serious progress toward peace between now and September, Palestinians
will declare a state composed of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem that
will be recognized by virtually the entire world. No matter whether the
declaration actually creates a Palestinian state or not, a declaration would
seriously undermine Israel's standing. In the
words of Defense Minister Ehud Barak:
We face a diplomatic tsunami that
the majority of the public is unaware of. Israel's delegitimization is in
sight.
That is why Netanyahu desperately wants to prevent a
September declaration. And it's why he
expects and needs the United States to stop it from happening. That is
something Obama can do, but not by simply shouting "no." Obama needs to tell
Netanyahu that the only way to avoid a unilateral solution is by brokering a
bilateral one. Running to Eric Cantor won't change a thing.