The Mouse That Roared—Once Too Often

Note

A Hebrew-language version of the op-ed appeared in Yediot Aharonoth on March 13, 2016. The translation was provided by the author.

The State of Israel has received over $120 billion in U.S. aid, an almost unimaginable sum. Negotiations are now underway on the next ten-year aid package, to succeed the current one, which has provided for approximately $3 billion in military assistance each year, when it expires in 2018. President Obama, a well-known Israel hater, who had the temerity to believe that a two-state solution is in Israel's interest and who achieved at least a postponement of a few years of the Iranian nuclear threat, agreed in advance to increase the annual aid by tens of percent, even at a time of deep budgetary cuts in the United States.

And how did Israel respond? With deep thanks and the humility worthy of a country whose very existence today is dependent on the good will of American presidents? With admiration for the president's magnanimity and ability to put aside the political and personal scars he bears from the all-out war the prime minister waged against him over the Iran deal and the obstacles he is continuing to raise before negotiations with the Palestinians? With deep appreciation for his ability to focus on that which is truly important, Israel's security?

Absolutely not. The prime minister began the negotiations, like a trader in a market, by posing a patently absurd request to increase the annual aid to $5 billion and by rejecting a proposal that would have provided Israel with $4 billion per year for a decade. In and of itself, there is nothing wrong with a proportionate and polite attempt to obtain a better package, our national security depends on it. At times, however, one has to know how to say thank you, that we understand that the United States, too, has constraints and to make do with less than the maximum that can be extracted.

It is clear to all that what the prime minister is really trying to do is to postpone conclusion of the new deal to the next administration, or at least to use the threat thereof as a source of leverage, as pay back and as a means of preventing Obama from claiming that he — the anti-Israel president — is actually acting to strengthen its security. To make matters worse, the prime minister even cancelled a meeting with the president, the leader of the greatest power in history, our foremost ally, with whom other leaders bang on doors and beg for the opportunity to meet. First, a fight with the president on the Iran deal, which was preordained to fail, now a hopeless struggle over the size of the aid package and a refusal to meet with the president. It has to end sometime.

Time after time, the prime minister, who claims to have a deep understanding of American affairs, has proven that this is not the case. Mitt Romney was not elected in the previous elections and a Republican administration under Donald Trump will not be more friendly towards Israel, maybe the opposite. In an unprecedented statement he has already made clear his intention to remain "neutral" in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He further told a group of Republican Jewish donors, in a statement that smacked of anti-Semitism, that he was richer than they are and, unlike other candidates, that he thus did not need their support. The slap in the face continues to echo.

Hillary Clinton, who lacks much in the way of sentiment, will not be much better. The United States, certainly the Democratic side, has simply had it with Netanyahu's policies on the Palestinian issue, with his double talk, and with what appears to be an intentional attempt to bury the two-state solution. If the premier truly understands the United States, he knows that a moment of reckoning on the Palestinian issue is nearing and that whichever candidate is elected will likely present us with fateful decisions, or cool the tenor of relations. We are not talking about a complete rift, this is no longer possible given the overall nature of the relationship today, but of a change in approach which will have significant ramifications.

Standing tall in pursuit of our true national needs is one thing, but what is happening now is reminiscent of the famous movie, The Mouse That Roared.  In this case, maybe one time too often.

Statements and views expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, the Harvard Kennedy School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.