Palestine : crise US - Israel ou Obama - Netanyahu ?

Publié le par Desbabas

Peut-on vraiment attendre un changement de cap de la politique americaine au proche-orient ? Une selection d'articles pour comprendre.

Ce premier article analyse le chagement de position de l'administration Obama.

Taking Sides - London Review Blog

In the wake of Vice President Joe Biden’s ill-fated trip to Israel last week, many people would agree with the Israeli ambassador Michael Oren’s remark that ‘Israel’s ties with the United States are in their worst crisis since 1975… a crisis of historic proportions.’ Like all crises, this one will eventually go away. However, this bitter fight has disturbing implications for Israelis and their American supporters.


First, the events of the past week make it clear in ways that we have not seen in the past that Israel is a strategic liability for the United States, not the strategic asset that the Israel lobby has long claimed it was. Specifically, the Obama administration has unambiguously declared that Israel’s expansionist policies in the Occupied Territories, including East Jerusalem, are doing serious damage to US interests in the region. Indeed, Biden reportedly told the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, in private:


    This is starting to get dangerous for us. What you’re doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us, and it endangers regional peace.




Cet autre article s'interroge sur la stratégie Israelienne.

De la crise à l’avancée ?

Netanyahou sera finalement reçu par le président Obama, en marge du congrès de l’AIPAC, le lobby juif de droite aux Etats Unis. Cette rencontre, la quatrième depuis l’arrivée au pouvoir de ces deux dirigeants depuis un peu plus d’un an, était encore incertaine la semaine dernière. Elle se déroulera suite à la plus grave crise dans les relations entre les deux pays depuis de nombreuses années, aux dires mêmes de Michael Oren, l’ambassadeur d’Israël aux Etats-Unis. Les engagements par écrit pris par Netanyahu, suite aux demandes américaines, ont permis qu’il soit invité par Obama à la Maison Blanche. Bien qu’aucune information à ce sujet n’ait été rendue publique, selon des sources israéliennes et américaines, il semble en effet que le Premier Ministre israélien se soit engagé à assouplir les conditions du siège de Gaza, à lever une partie des centaines de barrages et check points qui parsèment la Cisjordanie, à libérer des prisonniers proches du Fatah et à aborder dans le cadre des négociations indirectes, qui devraient commencer sous l’égide des Américains après les fêtes de pâques, toutes les questions centrales du conflit comme celles des frontières, des colonies, de Jérusalem, de la sécurité, des réfugiés et de l’eau, au lieu de se concentrer sur la procédure de négociation, comme il le voulait préalablement. Par contre Netanyahu ne s’est pas engagé à arrêter les constructions à Jérusalem qui, de son point de vue, ne sont pas différentes de celles de Tel Aviv. Il s’est seulement engagé à mieux contrôler ces projets et à les limiter, pour ne plus embarrasser les Américains, comme cela s’est passé récemment avec l’annonce de la construction de 1600 appartements dans le quartier de Ramat Shlomo. Si les négociations israélo-palestiniennes reprennent réellement sur cette base, on pourra dire que la crise qui vient de se dérouler, aura été bénéfique. Quelle stratégie les Etats-Unis vont-ils adopter à l’égard du conflit ? Dans cette étude, Gershon Baskin examine toutes les possibilités offertes à l’administration américaine. Le président Obama a aujourd’hui une position internationale plus forte suite au vote de la réforme de la couverture de santé par la Chambre des représentants. On peut espérer qu’il continuera dans sa politique de pression à l’égard des deux parties, d’autant plus que les sondages effectués récemment par J Street sur la position des Juifs américains à l’égard de son administration peuvent le conforter.



Un petit aperçu des enjeux de la situation à Jérusalem-Est, la partie parlestinienne de la ville : La bataille de Jérusalem


Haaretz : U.S. era of Jewish and Evangelist pressure is over
By Tzvia Greenfield

A little more than a year ago, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu formed the largest, most wasteful and extreme coalition in Israeli history. Tzipi Livni and Kadima may have won the most votes, but Netanyahu chose to bond with the wackiest, most extreme elements in Israeli society - to ensure Israel's continued hold on the territories and keep a two-state solution at bay.


Netanyahu's belief that occupation and messianism would serve Israel better than rational pragmatism is worrying, but not surprising.


Netanyahu's ideological preferences are known. It is still surprising, however, that once again he has emerged as a failing schlemiel of a politician. He cannot read the new global map and is incapable of evaluating his real chances of surviving as prime minister of a radical right-wing cabinet opposite the new administration in Washington.

    Advertisement

In opting against a centrist-pragmatist coalition with Livni, Netanyahu kept moderate people out of his government who could speak in a language acceptable to Barack Obama. This would have saved Netanyahu's cabinet from moments of tension and disagreement with the Americans.


It is clear that to do so he would have had to agree to Livni's demand to reach a final decision regarding the peace process, in order to ensure Israel's legitimate existence as a democratic Jewish state. He would also have had to agree to a rotating premiership with Livni - which would have spared him the shameful surrender to Yisrael Beiteinu and the ultra-Orthodox parties.


But Netanyahu did not accept Livni's terms to join the government and instead got himself into an impossible situation.Now he has thrown Israel into a dangerous, insufferable collision course with the United States and will apparently have to pay for it with his post.


Netanyahu could have been expected to understand the meaning of Obama's election as U.S. president and to prepare accordingly. Obama was elected without really needing the Jewish vote. He came to power on the back of a clear, enthusiastic agenda to make a fundamental break with all the previous administration's principles.


The era of Jewish and evangelist pressure in America is over, and a renowned Americanologist like Netanyahu should have seen that his lunatic politics would raise strong objections in the United States and endanger Israel and its future.


The writing was on the wall. Livni, who represents the Israeli center, could have conducted a friendly, more moderate dialogue with the Americans, thanks to her credibility and clear support for the two-state principle, unlike Netanyahu's lack of credibility in this arena.


Had Netanyahu really been an adroit statesman, he would have understood immediately that Livni was actually offering him the only way of running Israel in a new world. But Netanyahu did not understand. In his blindness he assumed that in the worst case he could trust the faded magic tricks of Ehud Barak and Shimon Peres. In view of the storm coming from Obama's direction, it is clear that these two cannot divert the lightning.


Washington wants unequivocal progress toward an agreement, and only Livni can do that. Anyone who doesn't see that has failed in a pathetic, worrisome way.


Netanyahu's wretched entanglement with the U.S. administration proves again that his judgment is fundamentally flawed and his political assessments are not merely invalid, but put Israel at risk.


Anyone who can't understand that we will end up bruised in a collision with a tough U.S. administration isn't capable of the simplest reality check and cannot be entrusted with fateful decisions of war. Bibi is dangerous to the Jews.


The writer was a Meretz MK in the 17th Knesset.

Commenter cet article