[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA

They genuflect at the end of the column ("7. And as for you, Netanyahu? Do
us all a favor and cancel the building in Ramat Shlomo.") but the rest of
the article is absolutely incredible.]

U.S. anger over East Jerusalem row is excessive
Haaretz 17 March 2010 By Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1156819.html

A few pointers for the Obama administration on the diplomatic crisis with
Israel:

1. I don't support Netanyahu. I think his policies on settlements and
building in east Jerusalem are wrong. I think he is stalling for time and I
would genuinely like to see a comprehensive political settlement with the
Palestinians. But America's response to the government's approval of 1,600
new housing units in Ramat Shlomo in northeast Jerusalem is excessive.

While it extends a hand to Iran, which continues in its effort to acquire a
nuclear bomb; and reaches out to Syria as it arms Hezbollah with advanced
weapons, it seems the Obama administration has made a conscious decision to
aggravate a diplomatic crisis with the Netanyahu government.

True, Netanyahu may - unintentionally - have caused the crisis, which
damaged U.S. Vice President Joe Biden. But now Obama's aides are refusing to
relax their grip, hoping to force Israel into declaring a total freeze on
building in east Jerusalem.

Washington ought to remember one thing, however: The majority of Israelis
wholly oppose halting construction in east Jerusalem. They may be angry over
the timing of the announcement - but most want building to continue.

So I am not at all sure that America's opposition to a democratic decision
by Israel's citizens will damage Netanyahu's standing at home. In the final
analysis, it will only push him further into the rightwing camp, by far the
country's most powerful political force. The left and center would in any
case never vote for him and the latest episode can only strengthen his image
in the eyes of the right.

2. As far as anyone can tell, Netanyahu was unaware of the Regional Planning
Council's decision to approve the 1,600 new homes, as was Eli Yishai, the
interior minister. Local councils don't usually apprise ministers - let
alone the prime minister - of their decisions. President Obama would hardly
be expected to approve personally plans for a new neighborhood in
Washington, D.C. - or even an expansion of U.S. military quarters in Iraq.

With this in mind, Washington conspiracy theorists' claims of an Israeli
ruse are misplaced - although the decision did make a hero of Yishai to the
Haredi community, which now sees him as some sort of national champion,
ready to face down the world's great powers in the name of resolving their
accommodation problems.

3. It is fair to assume that the Obama administration made a calculated
decision to attack Netanyahu, based partly on the presumption of support
from the Israeli public. It would indeed be easy for an outsider to
interpret recent reports in Yedioth Ahronot and Maariv as signs of a
consensus in Israel and the Israeli media that Netanyahu should resign.

But here again there is a misperception. The strident headlines are not
politically motivated but part of a battle editors are waging against the
rival Israel Today, known as a mouthpiece for Netanyahu. Yedioth saw now
problem in backing Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, who did not freeze
building in a single West Bank settlement, let alone in east Jerusalem.

More important, however, is that whatever Israeli journalists might say to
undermine the position of their prime minister does not necessarily give
foreign officials the right to say the same - even if they do represent the
president of the United States. It smacks of intervention.

4. Attempts to imply that Israeli policy is endangering the lives of U.S.
soldiers in Afghanistan, and even Iraq, verge on an insult to the
intelligence - U.S. citizens particualrly. Afghans don't care about Ramat
Shlomo, or about the Palestinians and Netanyahu. They have problems of their
own to deal with. As far as extremist Islamists are concerned, the
seven-year presence of American forces on Iraqi soil is a good enough excuse
to attack Americans.

Efforts by Obama's senior adviser, David Axelrod, to imply otherwise in
television interviews are dishonest. The only people who to suffer from
Israeli policy decisions are the Palestinians and neighboring states that
have peace agreements with Israel - Jordan and Egypt. Not a single U.S.
soldier in Afghanistan is at risk because of 1,600 housing units in
Jerusalem.

5. But perhaps what is most important is this: Palestinians see the Obama
administration's decision to attack Israel as an invitation to adopt a more
confrontational line. A previous settlement slowdown led Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas to exploit the opportunity and make any new
negotiations conditional on a total freeze in construction, including in
east Jerusalem.

Now signals from Washington have led his political faction, Fatah, to start
picking its own fight. A few days ago Prime Minister Salam Fayad called on
Palestinians to rally to the Temple Mount to "defend Al-Aqsa" after Israel
announced the dedication of a synagogue "next door to the Al-Aqsa mosque".
Even the most secular of Palestinian politicians, PLO executive committee
chairman Yasser Abed Rabo, joined in the condemnations and warned of an
escalation.

The need to defend Al-Aqsa is more than a little exaggerated. The synagogue
in question is not on the doorstep of the mosque. It is in the Jewish
Quarter of the Old City on a site it has occupied for more than 300 years.

But the PA has smelled blood. It understands that the international
community will not concern itself with secondary details, such as the fact
that the synagogue in question has would no doubt remain in Israeli
territory under even the most generous future peace agreement. So why not
start a riot and blame the Israelis, especially when the U.S. government is
doing the same.

6. In other words, it is time to tone down the rhetoric. It plays into the
hands of Netanyahu and encourages violence. American criticism is only
helping him in his bid for re-election and bolstering his coalition. Nothing
less.

7. And as for you, Netanyahu? Do us all a favor and cancel the building in
Ramat Shlomo.