US State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley marked the formal resumption
of Israel-Palestinian peace talks Sunday, May 9, with praise for the steps taken
by both leaders to get the process started, noting that "…from Prime Minister
Benyamin Netanyahu… there would be no more construction at the Ramat Shlomo
settlement in East Jerusalem for two years."
As a result, Palestinians are
celebrating their success in manipulating the Obama administration into
squeezing concessions out of Israel even before the talks begin - and on
Jerusalem, no
less.
Given Netanyahu's dogged insistence that there would be no Israel concessions
on Jerusalem, its undivided capital, even after Vice President Joe Biden's
unfortunate visit to Jerusalem in March, three hard questions demand
answers:
1. If the Israeli prime minister can't stand by his solemn pledges
to Israel and the Jewish people on Jerusalem, how much credibility can be
attributed his other statements?
2. Is he made of tough enough material to withstand pressures, or does he have a built-in tendency to surrender when the going is rough?
3. This answer is critical when applied to matters of national
security, such as the threats from Hizballah and a nuclear-armed
Iran.
The pretext offered by his
aides that giving ground on Ramat Shlomo cost nothing because the pre-planning
process requires another two years at least does not hold water. From his own
and his predecessors' experience, Netanyahu must know that every concession on a
question of principle opens the door to bullying for more. It will now be clear
to all that if he cannot stand the heat on Jerusalem, he will fold again in September when the
West Bank settlement freeze is up and find good
reason to let it run on and on.
Netanyahu manifested weakness by never once
hitting back at the unbridled and offensive assaults thrown at
Israel and him personally by members
of the Palestinian negotiating team, Saeb Erekat and Abd Rabbo in the last two
days. He ignored the insults and welcomed the PLO decision to endorse the
resumption of peace talks over which Abbas stalled for 15 months, mildly hoping
there would be no more preconditions.
He even abstained even from calling
for Palestinian officials to watch their language, least of all threaten to stay
away from the table until they stopped their incitement.
Netanyahu likewise
has nothing to say to the abuse heaped on Israel by
Iranian leaders and pro-Palestinian elements in the West, some of it rabidly
anti-Semitic.
Silence is not a policy. At best, it is a tactic of survival
and at worst, presents the appearance of timidity. In either case, he has
left Israel wide open to more arm-twisting
on its most fundamental interests.