Ari Shavit
The headline in the Hebrew print edition translates as "The Brave President Obama."
On the English-language Internet edition, it is "The world should focus on Obama, not Netanyahu."
".
. . the man sitting in the Oval Office is ignoring the possibility that
his inaction will make the Middle East go nuclear and undermine the
world order. He doesn't care that he might be responsible for losing the
United States' superpower status and turning the 21st century into a
century of nuclear chaos.
The
dispassionate man from Chicago is proving every day what rare stuff
he's made of. The president sees how the Iranians mock him - and does
nothing. He sees radical Islam approaching the nuclear brink - and does
not budge. With amazing courage Barack Obama watches the tsunami rolling
toward America's shores - and smiles. . . .
He
is staging a deceptive show of a deal with the Iranians, which will
seem to dull the . . . threat. He is trying to make a fool of Jerusalem
as Tehran is making a fool of him. The president is pushing Israel into a
corner, but is hoping that Israel will accept its fate submissively. He
is counting on Benjamin Netanyahu not to surprise him and ruin his
election season. Never has the United States had such a gambler for a
president. . . .
The
international community and international public opinion are
preoccupied with King Netanyahu these days - will he or won't he attack?
But instead of focusing on a statesman who isn't supposed to save the
world from Iran's nuclear program, it would be better to focus on the
leader whose historic role is just that. In the past 40 months Barack
Obama has been betraying his office. Will he wake up in the next four
months, come to his senses and change his ways?"
While
Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have
been saying that Israel cannot tolerate Iran with a nuclear program,
commentators are inclined to find splits in the Israeli establishment,
and speculate that Netanyahu and Barak are simply trying to pressure
Americans and Europeans into an firm posture on Iran.
Why would Israel risk its status among the decent countries by an lone
attack, especially in the run-up to an American presidential election,
and if the Americans and Europeans claim to have reached a satisfactory
agreement with Iran?
There
is no hard information about the sentiments of Israelis as they might
be affected by the details of a formal agreement, along with
reservations heard from Iranians, the continued insistence by ranking
Iranian officials that Israel must be destroyed, and signs of Iranian
waffling on what the Americans and Europeans describe as their
commitments.
Israeli
commentators did not greet with loud applause the claims of the
International Atomic Energy Agency head that Iran had agreed to
increased inspection. The news came along with the report that the
Iranians had already cleaned one of its most suspicious facilities of
nuclear activity in advance of an inspection. The halting and broken
English of the Japanese at the head of IAEA adds its bit of negative
symbolism. No doubt he had the advantage of translations from Parsi to
English and Japanese, but his halting praise of progress did not convey a
great deal of confidence that he understands the Iranians.
Shavit's editorial, including its prominent location in Ha'aretz,
suggests the breadth of Israelis' lack of confidence in the American
president and his colleagues in this mission. It does not help that
Catherine Ashton, ostensibly leading the European-American-UN
delegation, shown smiling as she was shaking the hand of the head
Iranian delegate, is viewed by reputable journals in her own country as a
caricature of a diplomat
No comments:
Post a Comment