Netanyahu and his sinister game plan

From killing the Oslo accord and weakening PNA to destabilising the region, it has all been part of the Israeli prime minister’s grand design

For half of the past two decades, Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu has served as Prime Minister of Israel. Whatever his ultimate fate (given the ongoing criminal investigations against him), it is clear that he has had a profound impact on Israel, Palestinians, and the entire region.

There are those who have doubted that Netanyahu had any core beliefs, other than the desire to retain power. But even with his manoeuvring and his penchant for prevarication, there are, in fact, core beliefs that have directed his career.

Shortly after his first election as prime minister, and before his maiden address to the United States Congress, a team of Ronald Reagan-era neo-conservatives (many of whom ended up in senior positions in the George W. Bush administration) wrote a paper for Netanyahu to guide his remarks before Congress and to US audiences. The paper, echoing many themes from Netanyahu’s own writings, was called ‘A Clean Break’. Since he was already aligned with these views, he repeated the paper’s themes and policy proposals during his many public appearances in Washington. ‘A Clean Break’ can be seen as Netanyahu’s road map to relations with the US and the Middle East region.

The central themes of the paper were:

Ending the Oslo process and rejecting “land for peace” formula; reasserting Israel’s claim to the “land of Israel”; weakening the ability of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) to govern; and poisoning the PNA’s image in the US to damage its standing,

Securing Israel’s northern border, by confronting Iran, promoting internal conflict in Lebanon, and destabilising Syria,

Strengthening ties with US Republicans, including proposing ending US economic aid in favour of military aid and buying into the Reagan-era idea of a “missile defence” system — a concept favoured by the GOP.

Confronting Iraq and overthrowing Saddam Hussain’s rule.

Over the past two decades, Netanyahu and his US allies, whether in or out of office, pursued these same objectives. To a great extent, they have succeeded. This unholy alliance between US neo-conservatives and Netanyahu was no accident. They had long been partners. Back in the late 1970s, Netanyahu convened many of these same thinkers to Israel for a summit at the Jonathan Institute — an event that some have called the birth of the American neo-conservative movement. Back then, their focus was hostility to the Soviet Union and the “national liberation movements” that were alleged to be Soviet pawns. The ideology they spawned was decidedly pro-Israel and anti-Arab, and extremely hostile to all things Palestinian. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Oslo peace process, and the election of Bill Clinton as US president, the focus of both the neo-cons (as they were called) and Netanyahu shifted. Seeing US Republicans as his allies in the effort to sabotage the peace process, Netanyahu’s Likud party set up a shop to provide talking points to GOP members of the Congress. Their goal was to make Republicans partners in their fight against the Clinton administration/Labour Party-endorsed peace process. With the GOP take-over of Congress in 1995, followed by Netanyahu’s election in 1996, the stage was set to kill the Oslo process. It was an unholy alliance of Likud and the GOP, squared off against Labour and the Clinton administration.

The goals laid out in ‘A Clean Break’ were not so much prophetic as they were a road map in which the neo-cons and Netanyahu laid out their plans for a new US-Israel partnership, a destabilised Arab world, and an end to Palestinian aspirations for independence. Whenever Netanyahu met with resistance from Clinton, he turned to the Republican-led Congress for support. He was dogged in his efforts to sabotage peace and largely succeeded. Even the one agreement Clinton finally forced him to sign with Arafat only served to lock the Palestinians into an untenable situation by consolidating Israeli control over much of the West Bank and their nightmarish presence in the heart of Hebron.

While the “break” envisioned in ‘A Clean Break’ was not as “clean” as the one he may have sought, the impact of Netanyahu’s first term created conditions that ultimately led to his hoped-for end of the peace process.

After his return to office in 2009, he was forced to endure eight years of a Democratic US administration, led by Barack Obama. Once again, he turned to his relations with a Republican-led Congress to resist pressures to make peace.

The writer is the president of Arab American Institute

Netanyahu and his sinister game plan

From killing the Oslo accord and weakening PNA to destabilising the region, it has all been part of the Israeli prime ministers grand design

For half of the past two decades, Benjamin Bibi Netanyahu has served as Prime Minister of Israel. Whatever his ultimate fate (given the ongoing criminal investigations against him), it is clear that he has had a profound impact on Israel, Palestinians, and the entire region. There are those who have doubted that Netanyahu had any core beliefs, other than the desire to retain power. But even with his manoeuvring and his penchant for prevarication, there are, in fact, core beliefs that have directed his career. Shortly after his first election as prime minister, and before his maiden address to the United States Congress, a team of Ronald Reagan-era neo-conservatives (many of whom ended up in senior positions in the George W. Bush administration) wrote a paper for Netanyahu to guide his remarks before Congress and to US audiences. The paper, echoing many themes from Netanyahus own writings, was called A Clean Break. Since he was already aligned with these views, he repeated the papers themes and policy proposals during his many public appearances in Washington. A Clean Break can be seen as Netanyahus road map to relations with the US and the Middle East region. The central themes of the paper were: Ending the Oslo process and rejecting land for peace formula; reasserting Israels claim to the land of Israel; weakening the ability of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) to govern; and poisoning the PNAs image in the US to damage its standing, Securing Israels northern border, by confronting Iran, promoting internal conflict in Lebanon, and destabilising Syria, Strengthening ties with US Republicans, including proposing ending US economic aid in favour of military aid and buying into the Reagan-era idea of a missile defence system a concept favoured by the GOP. Confronting Iraq and overthrowing Saddam Hussains rule. Over the past two decades, Netanyahu and his US allies, whether in or out of office, pursued these same objectives. To a great extent, they have succeeded. This unholy alliance between US neo-conservatives and Netanyahu was no accident. They had long been partners. Back in the late 1970s, Netanyahu convened many of these same thinkers to Israel for a summit at the Jonathan Institute an event that some have called the birth of the American neo-conservative movement. Back then, their focus was hostility to the Soviet Union and the national liberation movements that were alleged to be Soviet pawns. The ideology they spawned was decidedly pro-Israel and anti-Arab, and extremely hostile to all things Palestinian. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Oslo peace process, and the election of Bill Clinton as US president, the focus of both the neo-cons (as they were called) and Netanyahu shifted. Seeing US Republicans as his allies in the effort to sabotage the peace process, Netanyahus Likud party set up a shop to provide talking points to GOP members of the Congress. Their goal was to make Republicans partners in their fight against the Clinton administration/Labour Party-endorsed peace process. With the GOP take-over of Congress in 1995, followed by Netanyahus election in 1996, the stage was set to kill the Oslo process. It was an unholy alliance of Likud and the GOP, squared off against Labour and the Clinton administration. The goals laid out in A Clean Break were not so much prophetic as they were a road map in which the neo-cons and Netanyahu laid out their plans for a new US-Israel partnership, a destabilised Arab world, and an end to Palestinian aspirations for independence. Whenever Netanyahu met with resistance from Clinton, he turned to the Republican-led Congress for support. He was dogged in his efforts to sabotage peace and largely succeeded. Even the one agreement Clinton finally forced him to sign with Arafat only served to lock the Palestinians into an untenable situation by consolidating Israeli control over much of the West Bank and their nightmarish presence in the heart of Hebron. While the break envisioned in A Clean Break was not as clean as the one he may have sought, the impact of Netanyahus first term created conditions that ultimately led to his hoped-for end of the peace process. After his return to office in 2009, he was forced to endure eight years of a Democratic US administration, led by Barack Obama. Once again, he turned to his relations with a Republican-led Congress to resist pressures to make peace. The writer is the president of Arab American Institute