As Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu prepares to meet with President Obama later today, Bibi's territorial ambitions for Israel to annex large portions of the occupied West Bank will be his starting point in any talks with the Palestinian Authority.
ANALYSIS / On Netanyahu's map of concerns there is no room for neighbors
Instead of depicting the 1967 lines as 'Auschwitz borders,' the prime minister is inviting Abbas to negotiate on 'security borders'
So what does Netanyahu mean by his Orwellian term "security borders"?
On Netanyahu's map of concerns there is no room for concern about our neighbors. The prime minister has a consistent theory about where borders and security meet. Back during his first term he presented the government with the map of "Israel's vital interests." Col. (res. ) Shaul Arieli, who at that time was the deputy military secretary to the prime minister and defense minister, says Netanyahu's security borders leave more than 40 percent of the West Bank in Israel's hands.
What does Bibi think now?
The fundamentals of Netanyahu's "vital interests" map - according to his collected statements - have not changed. This map does not take the Palestinians' essential interests into account; it cuts off Palestine from the Jordan Valley and north of the Dead Sea, on the way to the Allon Road and the "step" that controls it from the west.
Israel is perpetuating, of course, the annexation of East Jerusalem and the surrounding villages, including the "Jerusalem envelope," in accordance with the triangle drawn by Yigal Allon - from Modi'in Elite to Mishor Adumim and back to the Etzion Bloc. And that's not all. Equally vital is the "western security expanse" from the school of Ariel Sharon, which the government of Menachem Begin approved in 1977 and which eventually became known as "the seam line area."
So according to Netanyahu the Palestinians will have to forfeit another 40% of the West Bank under Israeli occupation. That would leave the Palestinians with a bunch of disjointed Bantustans cobbled together into a neo-colonial dependency subject to Israeli domination.
This will be a non-starter for the Palestinians, which is probably exactly what Bibi wants: for any talks to fall apart quickly in the face of Israeli intransigence. Clearly Bibi's interests and U.S. interests are poles apart. Should the U.S. continue to invest billions to help Bibi achieve his territorial ambitions?
Here's the results of a leaked poll on how Americans view Israel:
Leaked Luntz Poll: Majority of Americans don’t support Israeli flotilla raid.
A summary of the findings:
1. 56% of Americans agree with the claim that there is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza;
2. 43% of Americans agree with the claim that people in Gaza are starving;
3. 34% of Americans support the Israeli operation against the Flotilla;
4. 20% of Americans "felt support" for Israel following announcement of easing of Gaza closure.
Does the American President have any leverage to move Bibi away from his maximal expansionist hard line, and toward meaningful peace talks?
Update:
While we don't know what was said behind closed door, here's the obligatory pro-Israeli boilerplate statement from Obama:
"the bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable." @
Update #2: Obama also uttered the most naive thing I've ever seen him say:
Obama, Netanyahu promise to work toward direct Mideast peace talks
"But the fact is that I've trusted Prime Minister Netanyahu since before I was elected. . . . He is dealing with a very complex situation in a very tough neighborhood."
This is right up there with Bush claiming he saw the goodness in Putin's soul when George looked into the Russian Presidents Svengali like eyes.