Bibi gets a slightly more pliant U.S. Congress

Gregg Carlstrom | January 20, 2010 6:42 AM | 1 | recommend (1) |   |      

One of the worst things a journalist can hear from an editor is "find a local angle." Aluf Benn apparently got that order from his boss at Ha'aretz last night, because he went out to write about the Massachusetts Senate election (won by the Republican candidate, Scott Brown) and came back with this thesis:

Over the past nine months, Netanyahu has managed to curb pressure from Obama, who enjoys a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress. Now, however, Obama will be more dependent on the support of his Republican rivals, the supporters and friends of Netanyahu.

I guess I missed the year in which the Democratic Congress -- which is still Democratic, by the way, despite Brown's win -- exerted any kind of real pressure on the Netanyahu government. Let's take a look at AIPAC's 2009 legislative report, shall we?

  • July: 226 House members sent a letter to Saudi Arabia urging Arab nations to make concessions to Israel.

  • August: 71 senators sent a similar letter to Obama, insisting that he push Arab states to "take dramatic steps to demonstrate their commitment to peace with Israel."

  • October: By overwhelming votes, the House provided Israel with $2 million in energy funding; voted 414-6 in favor of the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act; and voted 344-36 to condemn the Goldstone Report. The Senate Banking committee approved the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act by a 23-0 vote.

  • December: The House passed the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act by a 412-12 vote; Congress approved a foreign aid bill that gives Israel $2.2 billion in military aid, and a separate military spending bill that provides $203 million for Israeli missile defense.

More recently, when George Mitchell appeared to threaten to slash U.S. aid to Israel, a group of senators quickly reassured Israeli officials that Congress would never approve.

Brown's victory will certainly have an impact on Obama's domestic agenda. But on U.S.-Israeli relations, Congress was pretty pliant to begin with.

For updates throughout the day, follow us on Twitter, Facebook or RSS!

Categories: Diplomacy, Israel, Israel & Palestine, Obama Administration, Politics, Regional News

Tags: Aluf Benn, Benjamin Netanyahu, Congress, economic sanctions, George Mitchell, Goldstone Report

1 Comment

Jake Terpstra — February 10, 2010 5:12 PM

This thinking has no regard for justice, honesty or decency, but simple politial security. How did our government become so currupt?

Post a Comment

George Orwell, call your office

Benjamin Netanyahu says that the Goldstone Report -- which attempts to shine a light on crimes committed during a war which killed at least 1,100 people -- actually spells death for peace.

Playing softball with Bibi

The only shred of news in Lally Weymouth's interview with Bibi: Netanyahu said Israel is looking into setting up an independent inquiry into the Goldstone Report's findings.

B'Tselem: Settlements occupy 42 percent of West Bank

Ben-Eliezer makes "secret trip" to Turkey: Israeli TV

CENTCOM talking sense on Hamas and Hizballah

Al-Akhbar: Our weekly brief

Peace Processing

Talking about direct talks: Netanyahu returns to the White House

Gregg Carlstrom | July 6, 2010 4:00 AM | 0 | recommend (0)
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivering a statement in Jerusalem on July 1, 2010. (Photo: AFP)
US president Barack Obama will use a White House meeting with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to push for an extended West Bank settlement freeze. If Netanyahu doesn't offer one - and the domestic politics are quite difficult for him - it's hard to see any possibility of direct talks with the Palestinian Authority later this year.

The Afghan Surge

Obama's southern strategy

Gregg Carlstrom | June 24, 2010 6:09 AM | 1 | recommend (0)
Gen. David Petraeus testifying on Capitol Hill. (Photo: Reuters)
The president's decision to nominate Gen. David Petraeus as the commander of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan won't mean a major change in strategy. But there are mounting reasons for pessimism about current policy, particularly the relentless focus on southern Afghanistan. The deployment of tens of thousands of additional troops to Kandahar and Helmand serves few NATO objectives.

Freedom Flotilla Killings

Anticlimax: How much did the flotilla raid really change regional politics?

Gregg Carlstrom | June 17, 2010 7:35 AM | 4 | recommend (2)
A demonstration in London against the Israeli attack on the Gaza-bound flotilla. (Photo: AFP)
It has accelerated Israel's isolation from several of its neighbors and allies; it has sharpened divisions within Turkish domestic politics; it has deepened perceptions that the Obama administration as too close to Israel. And it seems to have had a remarkably minor impact on Palestinian domestic politics.

Bloggers

The "MSM"