Comment: What's interesting to me

(See in situ)

What's interesting to me

is what we read in this article that is important.

I assume (so excuse me if I am wrong because it is wrong to assume, but for the sake of understanding, please correct my asumption) that what you posted of the article was what was important?

The link to the source was broken Reprinted with permission from the Strategic Culture Institute.

So, based on what I read, this is what stands out to me:

"The New York Times believes that Tel Aviv is sidelining itself in the Geneva process and placing “its relations with Washington under severe strain.” Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, a member of the Knesset for the Labor Party and former Israeli defense minister, stated, “I support Netanyahu in that he categorically disagrees with any 'compromise' agreements on the Iranian issue, but we must not forget that the U.S. is our main ally. A deterioration of relations with the U.S. is of absolutely no use to us.”

Israeli analysts note Secretary of State Kerry's warning that Israel could end up in international isolation with its position on the Iranian issue. France, whose president, Hollande, has recently become close to Netanyahu, nonetheless signed the P5+1 agreement with Iran; Saudi Arabia abstained from openly condemning it; and other rivals of Iran in the region, Qatar and Bahrain, even welcomed the signing of the agreement. And there is no doubt that, despite promises to keep Israel informed of the progress of further negotiations with Iran and consider its interests when working out a final agreement, Washington will act at its own discretion. Secret bilateral negotiations between American and Iranian officials began as early as March 2013 in Oman. The meetings were held with the approval of the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iranian politicians today note that they “took a risk, but won.” Apparently, at some point the paths of the U.S. and Israel on the question of relations with Iran diverged, and the White House does not want Tel Aviv to hinder its plans. Israel's threats to attack Iran alone are becoming increasingly less believable, as they are heard too often. When Israel plans to attack, it does so without warning. At the same time, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert does not believe that his country will make a strike against Iran on its own. In his opinion, Netanyahu has already decided to accept a nuclear Iran and is fencing with President Obama more for tactical reasons.

That said, influential representatives of the pro-Israel lobby in the U.S., in particular Adam Garfinkle, editor of The American Interest, note with alarm a general tendency of Washington’s decreasing interest in alliance with Israel. Garfinkle writes that “American Jewry is in for a real shock: The 'special relationship' between the United States and Israel is fast eroding.” The cold war is over. Is Israel still a strategic asset to the United States? To answer this question, “just look around at the spate of post-1991 'greater' Middle Eastern 'episodes'—Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again, Libya, Syria, Egypt and, prospectively, Iran. In which of these cases could Israel be aptly characterized on balance as a useful ally of the United States? crises it is reduced to bystander status for the most part. In most of the episodes listed above Israel has been either irrelevant or somewhere between a complication and an inadvertent nuisance...opportunities for actionable strategic alignment where it counts most—at specific sparking points of geopolitical engagement – are so meager.”

In Garfinkle's opinion, rising anti-Israel sentiment can be seen even in the U.S. Democratic Party, which since the days of Franklin Roosevelt has been the political home of the vast majority of American Jews. The loss of the previous strategic closeness between the U.S. and Israel is leading to the widening of American-Jewish divisions and divisions between American Jews and Israel. “We may be witnessing,” the expert writes, “the intermediate stages of a death spiral, where the tighter that community wants to hold on to its image of the State of Israel, and to the state’s historical prolegomenon in the Holocaust, the more damage it does to itself. That’s the way, it would seem, the triangle [the U.S. – American Jewry – Israel. – D.M.] crumbles”."