Why was Netanyahu forced to have a spokesperson describe the meeting with Obama? Why are the US presidential elections the most important in Israel’s history? Why is IMI only a “scapegoat” in the Indian affair? And will Barak surprise with new appointments pertaining to Udi Shani and Yoav Galant?
The fact that the new head of Netanyahu’s publicity layout, Liran Dan, had to explain in the media that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and US President Obama had a “good meeting” regarding the Iranian issue, is not a good sign in itself.
If Netanyahu and Obama were really deeply coordinated, then the events following the meeting should have gone down more or less as follows: none of the heads of states would have said a word about the Iranian issue (and would have thus increased the pressure in Tehran); within a few weeks or months, upon the exhaustion (and near certain failure) of the economic sanctions, the US and its allies would have declared a naval and aerial blockade in the Persian Gulf. If the blockade wouldn’t have helped halt Iran’s progress towards a nuclear bomb – that’s when the assault stage would have arrived, be it Israeli or international.
Although that it is not what happened, the meetings that took place this week have historical significance nevertheless. Two very important things can be understood from Obama’s words after the meetings: Obama does not trust Netanyahu or Ehud Barak not to instruct the Israeli air force to attack Iran. Thus, he operated in order to effectively “lock” them by publicly announcing that the US believes that it’s too early for an attack.
At the same time, Obama announced an unprecedented commitment to Israel’s protection, and essentially promised Israel that the US is taking all the responsibility for halting the Iranian bomb. Obama announced that it is a US interest. This is no trivial matter. Yet, can his promise to halt the bomb be trusted? Not necessarily. November will see the most fateful elections in Israel’s history (in which the next US president will be elected). After the elections, Obama may change his skin, or a Republican president will be elected, one that will not be bound to Obama’s statements. Therefore, it’s entirely possible to agree with Netanyahu’s words in this context: that Israel is obligated to protecting itself by itself.
A Man of Words
Netanyahu is a person who attributes great significance to words. Each and every word he said this week in the US was measured. Netanyahu is also obsessed with his image (hardly an exclusive for this column, it’s rather well known). He arrived to the US directly from Canada. It’s possible to remember another occasion in which he also arrived from Canada, on May 30, 2010 (though that day is chiefly remembered due to the events onboard the Mavi Marmara, and less because of the US visit).
During that trip in 2010, Netanyahu first achieved the historic commitment which was also proclaimed this week, that the US will guarantee Israel’s safety (it occurred following behind-the-scenes efforts by the head of Israel’s National Security Council at the time, Uzi Arad).
After that visit, the Israeli media published the (incorrect) report that Obama had promised that Israel be approved construction of nuclear reactors for peaceful purposes. The US was furious, and the accusation for the leak was cast within the Prime Minister’s office on Uzi Arad – yes, the same Uzi Arad, who’s already been outside of the Prime Ministers office for a year, and who verbally attacked the Prime Minister last week over the same affair.
Gifts for Restraint
So what did we have this week? At the bottom line, an obvious warning coming from the direction of the US that Israel must not attack (even if it wasn’t an explicit prohibition). Furthermore, a more-than-implied US promise that it will take full responsibility for stopping the Iranian bomb, even if the possible Israeli window-of-opportunity for an attack (until the coming summer) is not utilized. And lastly, as according to Israeli tradition, there was a shopping list, but we cannot know if it was granted.
A “shopping list” is a tradition in which Israeli prime ministers arrive to the US with a request for a gift from the US, in exchange for any Israeli step, in the defensive or political field. Israel usually gains weapons or other gifts in exchange for concessions with regards to the peace process with the Palestinians or with regards to countries in its neighborhood. According to reports, Israel requested refueling aircraft from the US this time, which will enable it to increase the air force’s flight range, as well as additional bunker-penetrating bombs. The reward would not necessarily be an explicit commitment that it not attack. In any case, according to publications, Israel’s Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, also met with President Obama during his US visit from more than a week ago, and discussed these “gifts” with him. Even if the request was truly granted, it can be assumed that the US will not provide it to Israel at a date that will allow it to use the new measures in the imminent period.
Ashkenazi Is in the Bunker
While an Israeli option to attack Iran was apparently postponed in Washington, monumental efforts were invested this week in the local front, in the battle between the Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, and former Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, following the State Comptroller’s interim statement on the Harpaz Affair.
The current situation picture near the weekend in this front: after several utterances in which he took partial responsibility for the affair and cast a greater responsibility on Barak, Ashkenazi descended into the bunker, where he spends his time with his lawyer and prepares the response to the Comptroller. Barak and his people are heavily bombing the bunker, and will continue to do so, though it’s doubtful that it’ll be effective. Both Barak and Ashkenazi are in a bad place with regards to public opinion – at least with regards to this affair.
Interestingly enough, from this week’s developments was the demand by Brigadier General Imad Fares to be returned to the IDF, due to the things stated in Barak’s official announcement, which stated that Ashkenazi had wronged him. Logic dictates that if the Minister of Defense says such things, then there’s allegedly a “case” for the demand coming from Fares. However, will the current Chief of Staff, Benny Gantz, really bring the dismissed officer back into service? It doesn’t seem to be the case.
By the way, Barak claimed that Brigadier General Moshe (Chico) Tamir was also wronged by Ashkenazi, who dismissed him due to the affair in which his son drove a military-issued ATV. Gantz can be at ease when it comes to this issue: there’s no chance that Brigadier General Tamir will ask to return to service. He’s making great success (and money) as VP of Defense and Homeland Security for Gilat Satellite Networks (read the special interview with him in the coming issue of IsraelDefense, which will be published next week).
IMI on India’s Blacklist
On another matter: employees working at the various defense industries in Israel know to appreciate the considerable amount of work that they receive from India, which has been a tremendous market for the defense industries for more than 15 years. The collective scope of the sales there nearly reaches the figure of $10 billion.
The Indian issue rose to the headlines this week following the reports that Israel Military Industries (IMI) is still on the Indian Ministry of Defense’s blacklist of companies with which they are not to do business. IMI entered the list several years ago, due to an investigation in India into the actions of Indian businessman Sudhir “Bunny” Choudhrie. Choudhrie represented the company in a deal, in which it was supposed to establish a munitions factory on Indian soil at an investment of $240 million.
If Tamir and Fares are “victims” of Ashkenazi, according to Barak, then IMI is a “scapegoat” in a sense, as Choudhrie previously represented nearly all the Israeli defense industries in India, including Israel Aerospace Industries and Rafael. Furthermore, he was even a shareholder in both Aeronautics and Soltam (presently a part of Elbit Systems). The Israeli defense establishment can live with the ban on IMI, so long as no more bans are imposed upon other, larger companies as well.
Galant for the Ministry of Defense?
While we’re mentioning IAI, it’s hard to know the seriousness of the rumor in the defense establishment, that the current chairman of the Ministry of Defense, Major General (Res.) Udi Shani, will be IAI’s next CEO (following the anticipated retirement of Itzhak Nissan, the current CEO, in October). The same goes for the chances that Major General (Res.) Yoav Galant, who was dropped from the race for the position of Chief of Staff, will replace Shani as chairman. All this is according to a “master plan” attributed to Barak, one which was not written down in any document, such as the forged “Harpaz document.”
SOURCE: ISRAEL DEFENSE
Bernd Pulch 