Benjamin Netanyahu chose to call an early election in Israel in the hope that he could strengthen his hold on power. On Wednesday he appeared to have achieved his aim, but only after striking troubling positions that alarmed Israel’s neighbors and its Western allies — and that could come back to haunt his next government.
Benjamin Netanyahu chose to call an early election in Israel in the hope that he could strengthen his hold on power. On Wednesday he appeared to have achieved his aim, but only after striking troubling positions that alarmed Israel’s neighbors and its Western allies — and that could come back to haunt his next government.
Facing defeat at the hands of a center-left coalition, Netanyahu delivered what looked like desperate appeals to right-wing voters in the campaign’s closing days. First, he pledged that no Palestinian state would be established while he was prime minister, a vow that appeared to contravene his previous support for a two-state solution. Then, on Election Day, he warned his supporters that “Arab voters are coming out in droves” to the polling stations — an unconscionable appeal to racism.
The rhetoric appeared to have the intended effect of causing Israelis who previously supported far-right and religious parties to switch to Netanyahu’s Likud, propelling it to a decisive victory. While Netanyahu must still negotiate agreements with minority parties to form a government, a process that likely will last weeks, few Israelis doubt he will secure a fourth term as prime minister.
The price could be further degradation of Israel’s relations with European governments and the Obama administration and a dangerous standoff with the Palestinian Authority. The White House on Wednesday said it was “deeply concerned by divisive rhetoric” that sought “to marginalize Arab Israeli citizens” and reiterated its support for a Palestinian state.
As a practical matter, it long ago became clear that neither the Israeli leader nor Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is prepared to support the compromises necessary for a settlement. But by striking an overt position against Palestinian statehood, Netanyahu will likely add momentum to Abbas’ efforts to win a mandate for it from the United Nations Security Council. Abbas could act on long-standing threats to end security cooperation with Israel in the West Bank or to dissolve the Palestinian Authority, forcing the restoration of Israeli military rule.
Meanwhile, Netanyahu is likely to renew his campaign to prevent the Obama administration from concluding an accord with Iran on its nuclear program. With 22 months left in President Barack Obama’s term, the danger exists of an unprecedented rupture in relations between the two governments.
If Netanyahu wishes to prevent such a crisis, he has the means of doing so. He could, for example, offer assurances that he will not take steps that could compromise the future creation of a Palestinian state, such as expanding settlements outside zones that the United States has recognized as likely to be annexed by Israel. The Obama administration, for its part, should do more to assuage Israel’s legitimate concerns about Iran’s ongoing aggression in the Middle East.
Israelis remain strongly pro-American. But Netanyahu has proved that it is possible for an Israeli leader to campaign against the U.S. president and still win re-election. That doesn’t bode well for either U.S.-Israeli relations or for Obama’s ability to achieve his goals in the Middle East.