March 11, 2015
The
contentious diplomatic drama that was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu’s speech to the U.S. Congress last week has now expanded into a
full-fledged political farce, after 47 Republican senators sent a letter to the
Iranian supreme leader earlier this week. That letter basically insulted the
Iranians by suggesting they did not know how the American political system
operates, because, they argued, the next administration or president could
reverse any agreement President Barack Obama reaches with Tehran.
The tension between the Republican-dominated Congress and Obama is nearly a
constitutional crisis vis-a-vis the president’s prerogative to conduct foreign
policy. It is also quite unusual to see a sitting Congress actively trying to
thwart a foreign policy objective that the president is actively pursuing in
close coordination with five other world powers.
Those issues will blow over in time, but the more lasting impact of these
developments might well be the evolving relationship between the Israeli
government, the Republican Party in the United States, and the traditional
bipartisan position in the U.S. to policy towards Israel and wider Middle East
issues. Both the rightwing Netanyahu-led Israeli coalition government and the
Republican Party in Congress have reasons of their own to challenge U.S.
President Barack Obama, and they have chosen the nuclear agreement being
negotiated with Iran as the issue on which to confront him very hard and very
publicly.
The unprecedented manner in which both Netanyahu and the Republicans have
openly tried to shape American foreign policy on the basis of Israeli demands
has shocked seasoned political analysts I have spoken to during my visit in the
United States this week. Some note that this episode has crossed the line that
demarcates routine ideological contestation from the charge that American
elected officials are choosing to back a foreign government over their American
president. Some wonder if this is treason by those congressmen and women who
openly advocate the Israeli position. Others speak of a congressional gimmick,
while others yet charge the Republicans with risking war with Iran simply to
score political points at home.
The fact that most of Netanyahu’s accusations and scare-tactics warning about
what would happen if the nuclear agreement were reached with Iran are factually
wrong or highly exaggerated presumptions is not the real issue here. It is
rather that American elected officials who are sworn to uphold the Constitution
of the United States have chosen to act in a manner that makes them look like
they represent the wishes of a foreign government.
The fact that the foreign government in question is Israel also could put
Jewish Americans in uncomfortable positions where they might be accused of
having dual or torn loyalties to Israel and the United States—or worse yet, of
supporting Israeli policy over American policy.
I am not surprised that Netanyahu has resorted to the most ridiculous manner of
hysterical exaggerations, warnings, and historical analogies, because he
understands that an agreement on Iran’s nuclear capabilities would be an
enormous game-changer in the region, which would confront Israel with major new
challenges. An agreement would certainly open the way to more normal Iranian
relations with the United States and other Western powers, and would probably
force a reconfiguration of Iranian-Arab ties which are now often strained.
An unsanctioned and thriving Iran would be an attractive partner for any
country, and a stronger Iran that is not a nuclear threat would force a new
balance of power in the Middle East among Iran, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia
and perhaps Egypt. Israel would probably be unhappy with such a situation that
saw a handful of strong countries create a balance power that did not allow any
one of them to impose its will on the entire region. Israel today feels it can
do anything it wants to do anywhere in the Middle East, with total impunity.
That would change if a new regional balance of power arrangement were to take
shape. So Netanyahu is using any available tactic to prevent an agreement that
limits Iran’s nuclear capabilities, including going so far as to shatter the
traditional rules that governed U.S.-Israeli ties. Those rules said that both
parties in the U.S. political system would fully support Israel in virtually
every arena, but Israel would not interfere in domestic American politics.
Well, Netanyahu just tore up that rulebook, and nobody is quite sure what will
happen next. We are entering into uncharted territory, as senior American
officials and some members of Congress now openly criticize the Israeli prime
minister for brazenly trying to change American foreign policy by manipulating
members of Congress against the American president. Most of the damage done to
the U.S.-Israeli relationship will probably be patched up, but some of it may
remain. We will find out more about this in the American elections next year.
Rami G. Khouri is published twice
weekly in the Daily Star. He was founding director and now senior
policy fellow of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International
Affairs at the American University of Beirut. On Twitter at: @ramikhouri.
Copyright ©2015 Rami G. Khouri—distributed by Agence Global