SPONSORED BY:

Stand In

Why Obama should make George W. Bush his Mideast envoy.

Gerald Herbert / AP
Peace Partners: Bush and Obama could play good-cop, bad-cop with Israel
 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

On Sunday, George Mitchell, President Obama's Middle East envoy, arrived in Israel to confer with its leaders. Also visiting this week are Defense Secretary Robert Gates, national-security adviser James Jones, and Gulf States envoy Dennis Ross. It's a full-court press on the Israelis, and the American wish list is long. They want Israel to stop expanding settlements; to stop building Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem; and for hawks in the government to chill out while the U.S. is negotiating with Iran. And yet, odds are, they'll come back to Washington empty-handed, for reasons having to do as much with atmospherics as policy: Team Obama just doesn't have Israel's full trust.

But there is someone who does—someone who could use a job, someone who argued straightforwardly for a Palestinian state, and yet someone who has the implicit admiration and regard of Israel. President Obama needs a new envoy to the region who can get results—and George W. Bush is his man.

Indulge me for a moment. Obama has ruffled feathers in Israel by calling for a halt to settlement growth and talking openly about an equitable fate for East Jerusalem, which both Israelis and Palestinians claim as their capital. He has elicited deeply felt unease about how much the American president can be trusted to safeguard Israel's basic security.

Obama claims that the peace process is an essential plank of his program for the region, but it will be impossible to make progress if he can't convince Israel to defer to American leadership. In the history of U.S.-Israel relations, probably no president has earned adoration and unequivocal trust from Israel like Bush. (An Israeli diplomat once told me that the former president gave a speech at the U.N. during his second term that attracted so many adoring Israeli diplomats that even the deputy U.N. ambassador couldn't score a seat.)

During the Bush years, Israelis were consistently among the few foreign populations that gave the American president high approval marks—often in far greater proportion than Americans themselves. Senior officials in the Israeli Prime Minister's Office, where I worked, spoke on their cell phones daily with their White House counterparts—circumventing the State Department and the Israeli Foreign Ministry entirely.

That closeness paid off. It's no coincidence that, during the Bush years, Ariel Sharon had political cover to suggest "painful concessions" for peace—a euphemism for withdrawal from territory. The unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip—followed by preparations to withdraw from large parts of the West Bank that were interrupted only by the Hizbullah war of 2006—almost certainly would not have happened with anyone else in the White House less trusted to ensure Israel's safety.

Neither Obama nor his proxies enjoy anywhere near the same level of faith. In a recent Pew Research survey of global attitudes, Israel was the only country where the population's confidence in Obama's foreign-policy judgment was lower now than it was in Bush's judgment at the end of his presidency. (It was only 1 percent lower, but the rise in confidence elsewhere ranged from 6 percent in Pakistan to 79 percent in Germany, with most countries toward the upper half of that spectrum.) Even more striking: a recent poll found that only 6 percent of Jewish Israelis consider Obama a "friend."

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Visions of a Decade
Visions of a Decade

From 2000-2009, one photo per month.

The Failure of Copenhagen
The Failure of Copenhagen

Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.

Sex Scandals of the 2000s
Sex Scandals of the 2000s

From John Edwards to Mark Sanford, the decade's memorable affairs.

118 Days in Hell
118 Days in Hell

A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Rob007 @ 09/03/2009 12:26:48 PM

    You are talking about Bush's cute little walk holding hands, right?

  • Posted By: Rob007 @ 09/03/2009 12:25:40 PM

    "Wingnuts" - the first time I'd ever seen this used was against Bush. Interesting Boomerang effect. In logical and critical thinking terms, known as "projection".

  • Posted By: Rob007 @ 09/03/2009 12:24:28 PM

    This is not enough information to make the assumption that Bush Policies resulted in dramatics drops in worldwide conflicts (if that is in fact so). A dramatic drop can occur during any presidency, even during those under which some of the most devastating conflicts have occurred. The metric is merely relative to a previous year. Since Bush was in for 8 years, it is entirely likely that from 2001 - 2007 (the time period encompassing 2 major conflicts begun by US and their stabilization) dramatic drops occurred following previous dramatic rises in the first place, during the Bush first term. A closer look at terrorist attacks since 9-11 show no decrease, and actually relative increase under Bush.
    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html. Thus, it is not a matter of who (UN, etc..) supports the notion a dramatic decrease took place during Bush years, it is rather a matter of the relativity of such a metric. The only way such a statement could be of value is if the time period in which the dramatic decrease in worldwide conflict occurred was from 2000 to 2008, then we would need to know which previous or potential conflicts had been subdued because of Bush policies.

    Next question: Chechnya conflict, Georgia conflict, Internal Pak war in which Taliban under Bush retreated from Afghan to Pak (their homeland), Venezuelan's massive arming from Russia and war talk with US, Arms to Mexican cartels, war in Afghanistan (underresourced under Bush), Congo, Eritrea, Somalian Pirates, Sri Lanka (which now has more peace), Sudan, and Middle East, among many more all existed and continued massive conflict under 8 years of Bush as well. If the "One" is expected to resolve all of "Dear Leader's" problems - you are right. It is unrealistic.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now