Ha'aretz reports that, "For the first time since taking office, the public considers Benjamin Netanyahu less suitable to serve as prime minister than opposition leader MK Tzipi Livni." 36% name opposition leader Tzipi Livni; 23% choose Netanyahu; 7% choose Ehud Barak.
Meanwhile, in an internal Foreign Ministry memo, a senior Israeli diplomat in the U.S. writes:
"The manner in which we are conducting relations with the American administration is causing strategic damage to Israel. . . . The distance between us and the U.S. administration has clear consequences for Israeli deterrence."
Nadav Tamir, Israel's Consul General in Boston, "is viewed as a veteran, well-respected diplomat whose opinions are given considerable weight in Israel's foreign policy establishment, according to Channel 10."
Tamir, according to Yediot Ahronot, also (I think rightly) rejects claims that Obama has an anti-Israel bias.
continued
"As for the suspicions over the Obama administration's alleged intention and willingness to sacrifice Israeli interest for the sake of moving close to the Muslim world, I see no such indication."
Meanwhile, if senior Palestinian officials are to be believed, the Obama Administration is about to increase the pressure on Netanyahu by calling on Israel and the Palestinians to "address the issue of borders as the first step in the Middle East peace plan." (On the other hand, Ha'aretz also reports that "Saeb Erekat, head of the PLO's negotiating team, denied knowledge of the plan.") According to Ha'aretz:
The American plan will not specify step-by-step actions for an Israeli-Palestinian solution, but will address final status issues - borders, Jerusalem and refugees.
The Americans will set a timetable of about a year and a half for the negotiations and demand the sides first solve the border issue, under the belief that this will lead to solutions for other issues, such as the settlements and water. After that the sides will discuss the other fundamental issues - Jerusalem and the refugees.
Pressure on Netanyahu also will increase if Ha'aretz's assessment of the Fatah convention now concluding in Bethlehem finds general acceptance. The paper's Friday editorial is entitled, We do have a partner:
Fatah's new platform, and chairman Mahmoud Abbas' speech, won sweeping support from the more than 2,200 delegates who came from throughout the Palestinian Diaspora. From Bethlehem, they sent Jerusalem an unequivocal message: The Palestinian national movement's strategic choice is still two states for two peoples.
. . . the movement committed itself to the diplomatic option and the principles of the Arab peace initiative. Fatah formally distinguished itself from Hamas and joined the Arab and international consensus on a political solution - namely, the establishment of a contiguous Palestinian state on the basis of the June 4, 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and a just solution to the refugee problem by agreement with Israel, on the basis of UN Resolution 194.
* * *
The Palestinian public's avid interest in the convention, and the delegates' impressive attendance, testify that despite the numerous crises Fatah has undergone, it is still the leading popular political movement in the West Bank. The Israeli public and Israeli decision makers would do well to study the Bethlehem meeting's resolutions seriously. It is only natural for Israel not to accept Fatah's platform, just as the Palestinian leadership objects to Likud's platform. But Fatah's approach to the peace process refutes the right-wing argument that "there is no Palestinian peace partner."
In these circumstances, I suggest, supporters of Israeli-Palestinian peace will not want to make life easier for Netanyahu. Indeed, we ought try to maximize support for an active US role in the peace process along the lines being pursued by President Obama. This is a time for bringing people into the tent, not sowing discord and division.