A crystal ball on 2014

The only thing worse than being wrong is being right.

By DAVID M. WEINBERG
Obama White House Briefing Room 370 (photo credit: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)
Obama White House Briefing Room 370
(photo credit: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)
One year ago today, I accurately predicted in these pages that President Barack Obama would cut a deal with Iran over Israel’s objections, allowing Tehran to keep its nuclear enrichment facilities and freeing itself of sanctions by promising to halt 20-percent enrichment.
Precisely what happened.
I also correctly calculated that Washington would wedge Israel and the Palestinian Authority into renewed peace talks, and that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu would again freeze plans to build in E-1. I estimated that the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohamed Morsi wouldn’t last long as Egyptian president. Bingo.
But I was wrong in expecting a quick breakup of the Israeli coalition government. (Wait a bit more…) I was also wrong, unfortunately, in envisaging the election of a religious-Zionist chief rabbi. And I erred, fortunately, in reckoning that the Syrian civil war would spill over into real conflict on the Golan.
Looking into my crystal ball for the year ahead, this is what I see: Barack Obama: The US president truly abhors nuclear proliferation. So he really does not want the Iranians to test or produce a nuclear bomb on his watch. In Geneva, he’ll cut whatever deals are furthermore necessary to postpone Tehran’s bomb production for a few years; three years to be exact. As for the rest of us, well, Obama doesn’t really care about Israel, or the Palestinians, Egyptians, Syrians and Saudis. He isn’t going to invest any more American “blood, treasure and tears” in the Middle East. Killer drones against the al-Qaida types do the work from afar just fine. In any case, Obama knows that his legacy boils down to this and this only: Whether or not Americans can keep their existing health insurance plans.
John Kerry: All this Mideast peace-processing is a prelude to Secretary Kerry’s planned run in the Democratic primaries – against Hillary Clinton – for president of the United States. He will be a formidable contender, just as he is a formidable diplomatic juggernaut now. Of course, it’s easy for Kerry to beat up on Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas, the two Mideast actors most dependent on America.
Had he challenged the Russians or the Iranians (as he should have), it would’ve been tougher going. And then he would have been better prepared to take on and beat Hillary.
She will be no pushover.
Binyamin Netanyahu: The prime minister has crossed the Rubicon and no longer feels any residual political loyalty to residents of Judea and Samaria or to hardright voters. His willingness to rollback Judea and Samaria is easily deduced from his insistence on an Israeli military presence, only, in the Jordan Valley. While he has no nearterm plans to drag Israelis from their homes in Beit El or Hebron, his imminent agreement to John Kerry’s formula for a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 lines will mark a further retrogression in Israel’s diplomatic stance. Netanyahu thinks that a rhetorical framework agreement with the Americans and the Palestinians is the best way to manage the conflict for several years hence. He thinks it will restrict Palestinian options, prevent the PA from criminalizing Israel in international legal forums, and ward off European boycotts. But I think that he playing with fire, and that the gambit will backfire on Israel. World demands of Israel will only increase following the framework agreement, and, after feting Israel for a few days and praising Netanyahu for a few minutes, the world will be back in no time at all to threaten Israel with boycotts unless it acts on its latest concessions.
Mahmoud Abbas: The Palestinian leader is getting old and frail, and there is no succession plan in place, short of a bitter free-for-all with Hamas leaders in the mix.
Abbas is searching for a legacy, which could be a framework deal with Israel but could also easily be more unilateral moves against Israel on the global front. Either way, Abbas has got to hurry; I’m not sure he’ll be around by this time next year. In the meantime, the Palestinian Authority continues to huff and puff and blow evil smoke at Israel while raking-in the international aid dollars, euros, kronen, yens, francs and deutschmarks. It’s almost as hard to account for all that money as it is to count the number of times that Saeb Erekat has quit as chief Palestinian negotiator.
Moshe Ya’alon: Bogie is proving to be the most cleareyed and steady politician in the cabinet. While everybody else is running around scared of an impending “diplomatic tsunami” whereby Israel could be branded a “rogue state” for being on the wrong side of the international consensus on both the Iranian and Palestinian issues, Bogie is calm. When Tzipi Livni screeches “gevalt, we’re going to be boycotted” and drives for Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria, Bogie Ya’alon responds logically that “in life, everything is a question of alternatives. If the alternatives are a European boycott, or rockets from Nablus, Jenin and Ramallah on our strategic front, and on Ben-Gurion International Airport – then indeed a European boycott is preferable.” Let’s hope that Ya’alon holds firm.
Moshe Kachlon: The Likudnik who brought down cellphone costs plans to cash in on his popularity, on simmering social-economic discontent, and on disenchantment with Yesh Atid. He’ll be back this year with a new political party, accompanied by trade unionist Ofer Eini, economist Manuel Trajtenberg, Generals Gabi Ashkenazi and/or Shlomo Yanai and other prominent figures.
Netanyahu, Yair Lapid, Issac Herzog and Arye Deri should be worried. Israelis love new political parties, and Kachlon’s fresh lineup could tap into public disgruntlement with alacrity.
Shimon Peres: This wily 90-year-old plans to come roaring back into Israeli politics when his term as president ends this summer. He will set himself up as a shadow prime minister to fervently advance his plans for peace with the Palestinians. He will convene international conferences to wedge Netanyahu against the wall, and cobble together new Israeli political slates to challenge Netanyahu at the polls. Expect no more of the namby-pamby Peres-sponsored “Tomorrow” conferences, where “bold” entrepreneurs, “provocative” sexologists and “prominent” European intellectuals talked mumbo-jumbo about “bottling the Jewish genius” and “generating the leaders of tomorrow.” Instead, expect an aggressive, focused Shimon Peres with a killer instinct, out to remake the Middle East and save Israel – as only he can.
Natan Sharansky: By dint of personality and experience, in deference to Zionist history, and to boost global Jewish unity – Natan should be the next president of the State of Israel. His election should be a slam dunk. Alas, Silvan Shalom of the Likud and Binyamin “Fuad” Ben- Eliezer of Labor each has a better chance of getting the necessary votes in the Knesset to become head of state, because of narrow political calculations. Silvan’s election would free up three ministerial portfolios (regional development, negev and galilee, energy and water) for other Likud MKs. Fuad can pull in votes from across the political spectrum, including from the Center, Left and Arabs. Too bad.
I’m still rooting for Natan.