To return to the new Peace Now website click here.

Enough already with the "Obama-caved-to-Bibi" Spin

It is Day 3 of the "Obama-caved-to-Bibi" editorializing.  Enough already.  

Yes, it would have great if during this week's visit Obama has made explicit his expectation that the settlement moratorium should be extended past September 26th.  And yes, many of us would have liked to hear him press Bibi on issues related to Jerusalem, Gaza, and Bibi's readiness to discuss all final status issues in negotiations and achieve a peace agreement to realize the two-state solution.  

But we all knew in advance that the goal of this visit - for both Obama and Bibi, each for his own reasons - was a clear public statement that relations between the two are fine.  And barring some 11th hour Israeli provocation - an outrage on par with the Ramat Shlomo embarrassment during the Biden visit, or the announcement of building permits for Shepherds Hotel the same day Bibi was set to meet Obama on his last visit - that was always what this was going to be.  The point being: nobody should be surprised that both Bibi and Obama were content to rhetorically avoid or gloss over any disagreements.

But reading all the articles and blog posts, it is hard not conclude that a segment of the population is deeply disappointed that this visit didn't end up in a public fist-fight, or at least the diplomatic equivalent thereof.  And absent that, it seems that many pundits aren't content with anything less than calling this visit a total triumph for Bibi and defeat for Obama (the exact opposite of their appraisal of Bibi's last visit).

This is so silly.

Beneath the headlines of the past 15 months - breathlessly reporting the alleged demise of the traditionally strong US-Israel relationship - lurks a very different reality: strong US-Israel cooperation in pretty much all areas. Cooperation that is stronger even than during the time of Israel's erstwhile "bff" (best friend forever), George W. Bush.  

This whole time, by any objective, concrete measure, things have actually been going very well between the two countries, even if by the yardstick of PDAs (public displays of affection) relations seemed tense.  But given the choice between reporting on the very concrete proof of good US-Israel relations, and reporting the latest E! News-style gossip about who's mad at whom, the latter of course won out.   So the public narrative has been all about the rift, or the shift, or whatever you want to call it, between the two countries and the two leaders.

This means that those who like the idea of the US and Israel being at odds spent the past 18 months giving Obama credit that he didn't deserve.  And those who hate the idea have been excoriating Obama unfairly.

Both these narratives were totally out of sync with reality.

After this visit, once the "Bibi-rolled-Obama" reporting peters out, both narratives will have to be recalibrated to fit reality.  In this reality, nations and leaders don't always agree, but that doesn't mean that the bilateral relationship is in the toilet, and in this reality, daily gossip columns masquerading as news don't provide any real insight into foreign policy decision-making.

And maybe then the E!-style reporting - excitedly reporting the alleged tiff between Bibi and Obama as if it were the latest chapter in the breakup between last season's star of the Bachelor and his fiancĂ©e Vienna - can finally end, and we can focus on the real issues and challenges that lie ahead.  

Why should we care if Bibi and Obama like each other, if they trust each other, or if their wives have stuff in common?  

What we should care about is whether, by the time we get to September 26th (the expiration of the settlement moratorium), the Obama Administration has mustered the political will to twist Bibi's arm - and it will take some twisting - to extend the moratorium, and without adding any new exceptions.  

We should care whether the Obama Administration will have the wherewithal to get Bibi to intervene the next time the settlers or the mayor launch a serious provocation in Jerusalem.

And we should care whether, come the opening (hopefully soon) of direct Israeli-Palestinian talks, the Obama Administration has the courage, vision, commitment, and resolve to demand that both sides come to the table in good faith and that both sides act in good faith away from the table. 

And we should care about whether, come the day when the sides reach (the inevitable) impasse, the Obama Administration has the will intervene to keep moving the ball forward towards peace.

It is not unreasonable to hope that this latest Bibi visit - and the recalibration of the narratives that results - will strengthen the Obama Administration's hand and bolster its resolve with respect to these important challenges.  We can be hopeful - meaning, to paraphrase President Obama, that we need not be blindly optimistic nor needlessly pessimistic.

We should judge President Obama on what happens at these critical decision points and start ignoring the gossip disguised as news.