Clipping de notícias sobre o Oriente Médio

Prévia do material em texto

18 
 
 
Oriente Médio 
 
How Trump Could Make Netanyahu's Job Harder 
Fonte: Foreign Affairs 
Dia: 26/01 
Link: http://fam.ag/2jvZD1l 
 
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu likely has high hopes for U.S. 
President Donald Trump. Trump has gone to great lengths to differentiate 
himself from his predecessor, President Barack Obama, who had a tense 
relationship with Israel on account of his anti-settlement stance and his support 
for nuclear diplomacy with Iran. Netanyahu—who has long-standing 
relationships in Republican circles—may be looking forward to finally having a 
GOP counterpart in the White House. That said, despite greater superficial 
compatibility on policy and politics, Trump may create as many problems for 
Netanyahu and Israel as he solves. 
 
THE GOP TIES THAT BIND? 
 
Although he has never before served as prime minister during a U.S. 
Republican administration, Netanyahu has deep ties with the GOP. As U.S. 
evangelicals became politically active as Republicans during the 1980s and 
1990s, he recruited them to Israel’s cause, even trying to leverage their support 
to counter President Clinton during peace talks. During the 2012 presidential 
race, moreover, Netanyahu’s apparent preference for former Massachusetts 
Governor Mitt Romney went uncorrected. The Israeli prime minister also has a 
19 
 
close relationship with Republican mega-donors, such as casino magnate 
Sheldon Adelson. 
 
Netanyahu developed these ties in part because he believed that Republicans 
would be less likely than Democrats to pressure Israel on key issues, such as 
territorial concessions to Palestinians and Israeli wartime conduct. Republican 
opposition to Obama’s Iran nuclear deal and abstention on a resolution against 
settlement building in the United Nations Security Council reaffirmed 
Netanyahu’s conviction. 
 
Trump, however, is a political newcomer with only loose ties to the party 
Netanyahu has befriended, making his views and intentions uncertain. The 
president seems eager to demonstrate his closeness to Netanyahu, nominating 
an ambassador, former campaign adviser David Friedman, who is highly 
unlikely to press Netanyahu on Palestinian issues. Yet Trump may cause 
Netanyahu discomfort in pursuit of what he called the “ultimate deal” between 
Israelis and Palestinians because renewed diplomacy could lead Trump to 
press Israel for concessions. Trump may also make Israel more vulnerable by 
forgoing traditional Middle Eastern partners or, worse, by simply disengaging 
from the region. And Netanyahu could alienate segments of the U.S. Jewish 
community by embracing Trump. Indeed, although a supportive Republican 
president may appear to benefit Netanyahu at first glance, the consequences 
of Trump’s presidency may be more complex. 
 
THE DOMESTIC COST 
 
For one, Israeli domestic politics could get much more complicated. 
Perceptions among the Israeli settlement movement of the incoming 
administration’s support for its cause could remove Netanyahu’s best excuse 
for limiting settlement growth to stave off international pressure. In a recent 
Israeli Democracy Institute poll, over 70 percent of Jewish Israelis responded 
that they thought or were sure that Israel would be able to keep building 
settlements under a Trump presidency. The pro-settlement movement has 
rejoiced at Trump’s early rhetoric on the issue. 
 
Netanyahu could therefore find it harder to hold off pro-settlement hard-liners, 
who wish to build throughout the West Bank and legalize outposts in the heart 
of a future Palestinian state. Obama’s opposition signaled these moves’ 
bilateral and international diplomatic costs, including pressure and unfavorable 
moves at the United Nations, giving Netanyahu an excuse for moderation. 
Although Netanyahu decried U.S. abstention on a United Nations Security 
Council Resolution condemning settlement expansion, he still used its passage 
to justify shelving a law that would legalize outposts built on privately owned 
Palestinian land. 
 
20 
 
With Trump in office, Netanyahu’s warnings about settlements’ diplomatic costs 
will become less persuasive. Pro-settler leaders will expect U.S. backing and 
claim that a supportive U.S. administration will be able to minimize costs 
internationally. However, Arab and European countries are almost certain to 
continue to oppose such outposts as a barrier to a two-state solution. With 
Trump, Netanyahu may have to mollify his domestic coalition through continued 
settlement building and face the prospect of international isolation. Already, 
Israel has announced expanded West Bank building despite international 
condemnation (not inlcuding the United States), and Netanyahu faces pressure 
to annex large settlements. 
 
With Trump in office, Netanyahu’s warnings about settlements’ diplomatic costs 
will become less persuasive. 
 
Trump’s campaign pledge to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to 
Jerusalem also shows how a more supportive U.S. administration could create 
problems for Netanyahu. The Israeli government would certainly welcome the 
symbolic U.S. support that would accompany the move, but may privately worry 
about the resultant potential for Palestinian violence and Arab condemnation. 
Palestinian perceptions that a U.S. move predetermines Jerusalem’s status, 
rather than leaving it to Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, could also complicate 
U.S. peace mediation and make Palestinians reticent to negotiate. Netanyahu 
cannot publically reject Trump’s attempt to move the embassy, but Trump’s 
actions could create problems for Netanyahu down the line. 
 
THE AMERICA FIRST FACTOR 
 
As Trump complicates Netanyahu’s domestic politics, his broader approach to 
the Middle East may also harm Israeli regional interests. Although Trump has 
yet to articulate a clear policy, there are indications that his administration may 
be more withdrawn and transactional than its predecessors. On the campaign 
trail, Trump scorned hard alliance commitments and showed little interest in 
invigorating an alignment of the United States, Israel, and Sunni moderates 
against Russia, Syria, and Iran. Instead, he has pledged that he will avoid 
interventions against foreign states and promised to work with Russia to defeat 
the Islamic State (ISIS). 
 
Of course, a Trump administration could still veto unfavorable U.N. resolutions 
and denounce Palestinian attempts to internationalize the conflict with Israel. 
Yet heading off broader trends and helping Israel build relations with Arab 
states would require Trump to prioritize the Middle East. A Trump 
administration less invested in the region may also be less inclined to spend 
time deepening bilateral defense and intelligence ties with Israel. Israel would 
still receive U.S. defense aid, but it would not have a superpower attuned to its 
interests or needs. 
21 
 
 
To be sure, Trump and his national security adviser, Michael Flynn, do seem 
interested in fighting terrorism around the world. As in the wake of the 
September 11 attacks, Israel could try to position itself—with its decades of 
experience—as a key ally in counterterrorism. Yet if Trump lacks an emotional 
connection with Israel and a broader instinct for engagement in the Middle East, 
he could view such assistance as transactional rather than as an inherent 
strategic asset. It is too early to tell, but if Trump’s instincts lead him to 
disengage from the Middle East, Israel is likely to pay the price. 
 
A BIPARTISAN COMMITMENT NO MORE? 
 
By working with Trump, Netanyahu may endanger bipartisan support for the 
U.S.-Israeli bilateral relationship, which Netanyahu himself has called 
strategically important. Although Obama and Netanyahu often sparred, 
Obama’s steadfast support of Israel offered the UnitedStates’ pro-Israel Jews 
who took issue with Netanyahu’s stances on settlements or religious pluralism 
a template for supporting Israel while opposing some of its government’s 
policies. That room became particularly useful in the wake of Netanyahu’s 
congressional speech opposing the Iran deal, which forced Jews in the country 
to back either Netanyahu or Obama. Both still offered ways to support Israel. 
With Obama gone, liberal Jews may find it harder to square their values with 
an Israeli leader openly supportive of Trump. 
 
 
After all, 71 percent of U.S. Jews voted for Democratic presidential nominee 
Hillary Clinton. Many fear Trump’s generally illiberal tendencies and his alt-right 
supporters. Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer’s praise for Frank Gaffney—the 
head of the Center for Security Policy, a think tank that the Southern Poverty 
Law Center has deemed an anti-Muslim hate group—shows how Israeli efforts 
to become closer with Trump and his supporters could alienate liberal Jews. 
Pro-Israel Jewish progressives rationalize Israel’s occupation of the West Bank 
by arguing that Israel’s liberal democratic values mean that its government has 
done and will do all it can to make peace. Israeli officials’ public embrace of a 
U.S. administration with seemingly illiberal instincts would call these shared 
values into question. 
 
If Netanyahu expands settlements or goes to war with Hamas under Trump’s 
watch, Democratic lawmakers could take cues from their Jewish constituents 
tired of witnessing the perceived misdeeds of an Israeli government backed by 
an unpopular Trump administration. These lawmakers would likely still back 
Israeli leftists, but governments such as Netanyahu’s would increasingly rely on 
exclusively Republican support. In the long run, mismatches between U.S. and 
Israeli administrations would produce periodic non-cooperation and endanger 
Israel’s security and diplomatic standing. 
22 
 
 
If Netanyahu takes these potential problems seriously, he could mitigate their 
effect. Quiet communication with the incoming administration could develop 
internationally palatable arrangements for expanded settlement construction 
only within large blocs. Private Trump-Netanyahu meetings present an 
opportunity to encourage the new president to engage in the Middle East. 
Coordination among U.S. Jewish communal leaders and elected officials with 
Netanyahu could minimize factors that would deepen the partisan rift. All of 
these steps first require Netanyahu to treat Trump as both an opportunity and 
a challenge