1. Skip to content
  2. Skip to main menu
  3. Skip to more DW sites

Same story, new options

Gero Schliess / cdOctober 2, 2014

The forward march of "Islamic State" could bring US President Obama and Israel's Netanyahu closer together again. Yet there were no such indications during the latter's visit to Washington, writes DW's Gero Schliess.

https://p.dw.com/p/1DOa0
Benjamin Netanyahu with Barack Obama
Image: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

This time, everything could be different.

President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu had met with each other countless times. There's likely no other foreign head of state who's been received more often by the White House. Yet the encounters have never been the kind of cordial family affair embraced warmly by either party, or where a common assessment of world events could quickly be found. Whether it's the century-long conflict between Israel and the Palestinians or nuclear talks with Iran, the battle lines between the two men have always remained entrenched: Where Benjamin Netanyahu accuses the American president of leniency and a too-weak heart, Obama considers Israel's president a headstrong man who prevents peacemaking agreements through severity and an unwillingness to compromise.

This time, everything could be different. Because the world has changed. It's more dangerous than before - and for Israel, too. The country is surrounded by violence and chaos like never before: From Syria to the Gaza Strip, from Iran announces 'military grant' for LebanonLebanon to an apparently stable Egypt. Danger lurks everywhere. All of which is dwarfed by the unprecedented terrorist threat posed by the "Islamic State" (IS) militia. That group has created a tightening of alliances - including the Arab Gulf States and the Americans.

Whether it will bring the US and Israel closer is, however, uncertain.

Shared interests

In any case, there's movement in the old constellations of the Middle East. For the first time in many years, Obama has succeeded in bringing five Arab states together in a coalition with the US. Netanyahu, during his meeting with Obama, alluded to that fact and rightly pointed out that there are shared Israeli-Arab interests involved. They concern not only the fight against IS, but also opposition to Iran, a country which threatens Israel twice over: first, through Iran-allied Hamas in the Gaza strip, and second, through Iran's nuclear program, the negotiations over which have involved Germany for nearly a year now.

It's true: the shared interests between Israel and the Arab states could open up completely new strategic options. It's just that Netanyahu shouldn't say it so loudly, since as long as there is no agreement on a reasonable two-state solution with the Palestinians, there will be no political leeway for rapprochement between Israel and the Arab potentates. Nor can President Obama do much to change the fact that the prospects for such conciliation have darkened ever since the bloody Gaza war. During that time, American critiques of Israeli policies and the many Palestinian civilians killed had little effect.

Now, before the important mid-term Congressional elections in the US, the strong Jewish lobby holds an effective lever in hand, backing Obama into a corner and weakening his position against Netanyahu. For the president, what remains is merely to urgently admonish Netanyahu once more to seek a lasting peace with the Palestinians through a change of the status quo. Obama bared his teeth, at least, through a deferred threat: By continuing a planned settlement, Israel would distance itself from its closest allies.

Changed world?

This time, everything could be different - but things don't look good.

Netanyahu never recognizably softened his position in Washington with regard to the Palestinians. The same is true for the Iran issue. A week earlier, he deliberately used his speech at the UN General Assembly to pull out the heavy oratorial artillery, arguing that while "IS" is extremely dangerous, Iran represents the far greater threat. In doing so, he hoped to increase pressure on President Obama once again, so that the US president won't agree to any compromises that will, in the near term, allow Iran to develop the skills necessary to build a nuclear bomb.

But perhaps Netanyahu isn't thinking strategically. Just as the American anti-IS coalition opened new options with the Gulf States, an agreement with Iran could also change the international situation. The whole region would benefit from Iran's potential participation in the fight against "IS" terror. And Iran's allies in Israel's immediate neighborhood - Hamas as well as Syrian President Assad - would lose, at least in the short term, their immediate threat and destructive power.

That things will come to that seems rather unlikely. But one shouldn't lose hope.