IsraCampus.Org.il

Days after being sworn in, U.S. President Barack Obama declared that he would `actively and aggressively` pursue peace between Israelis and Palestinians. It is not yet known, however, to what extent the new administration will break from previous US administrations, in serving as an honest and impartial broker of peace. Above all, how far will the US go to pressure on Israel to implement its obligations to freeze settlement activity, dismantle the illegal outposts, and enter into negotiations for an end to occupation and the formation of a viable, independent Palestinian state?

As Obama`s envoy, George Mitchell, travels to the region, prospects of a just settlement are immeasurably worse than they were eight years ago. Throughout the Bush years, Israel has preferred to use force to suppress Palestinian resistance and national aspirations, while using the chaos that has resulted as an alibi for its failure to negotiate, let alone honor its previous commitments or international law. Despite whatever good intentions the new administration may have, Israel retains the ability to manipulate the situation, as it has for years, to avoid exposing itself to US pressure to carry out a real reversal of its colonization of the occupied territories. It can be counted on to resort to any combination of the following tactics:

1. Provocations. This is a card that Israel has played many times in the past when it desired to keep the conflict militarized and head off the threat of negotiations. Most recently, the incursions in early November 2008 in the Gaza Strip effectively ended the ceasefire with Hamas and provoked the rocket launches that were the pretext for the Gaza war. But this was just the latest of many carefully timed provocations. On 12 March, 2008, Israeli undercover agents assassinated Fatah Commander Ahmed Balboul, who had not been connected to attacks on Israel in years, and who openly supported a negotiated peace. The assassination came just as the US was trying to persuade Mahmoud Abbas to return to the negotiating table. Israel has a long list of targets that it can hit just in time to provoke a response, or to make it difficult for the Palestinian side to continue negotiating. These moves inevitably embarrass any Palestinians who are in the midst of negotiating with Israel as it carries out such attacks.

2. Interfering with Palestinian unity efforts. Peace agreements can only be concluded with a legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Israel and the U.S. cannot simply appoint Mahmoud Abbas as the representative of the Palestinians as a whole and expect that any agreement he signs will be worth more than the paper it`s printed on. Negotiations without the involvement of the elected leadership are all but meaningless. But Israel has refused to negotiate with Hamas or a government that includes the movement. With active US cooperation, Israel helped torpedo the last Palestinian unity government by arming and funding Fatah militias pursuing a coup. These interventions are justified as being designed to help Palestinian moderates and marginalise Hamas, but in reality their only effect is to prevent the formation of a coordinated Palestinian front that could negotiate effectively in the name of Palestinians as a whole.

3. Keeping the Gaza conflict going. If the Gaza conflict can be kept alive at low intensity, it will provide an alibi for Israel to postpone any progress on political issues. As Hamas can be counted on to build up its military capabilities, there will be no shortage of excuses to launch attacks on the strip that will stymie negotiations.

4. Limiting the agenda to easing humanitarian situation. If Israel agrees to negotiations with the Palestinians, it will try to avoid discussing the final status issues, or even any substantive issues. Rather, it will try to limit the negotiations to humanitarian or so-called good will measures, such as easing the blockade on Gaza or removing roadblocks in the West Bank. Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of the Likud Party, which now leads in pre-election polling in Israel, has suggested that he will adopt this strategy. The Likud has promised to discuss only humanitarian issues and economic development with the Palestinians, while freezing the political issues of territory, independence, and refugees. And one goal of the siege on Gaza has been to turn a political issue into a humanitarian one.

5. Creating `facts on the ground.` This is the easiest of Israel`s tactics for the US to confront, and it has a good deal of leverage to force Israel to cease settlement expansion. Nonetheless, if Israel forces a confrontation over outposts, annexation, and settlement expansion, it will shift the agenda away from the necessary massive removal of settlements.

All of these tactics have been convenient for Israel and the US, allowing them to support Palestinian rights and peace in principle, while in practice denying them. Through Palestinian fragmentation, continued violence that Israel itself often instigates, and the decline of the Palestinian Authority, Israel has worked hard to make the complaint of `no partner` a reality.

This is why George Mitchell and the Obama Administration have such a difficult task. The new president must anticipate the lengths to which Israel will go to avoid direct, substantive, and binding negotiations. Real pressure on Israel will inevitably result in a confrontation as Israel will make moves such as those listed above to test Obama. He will have to be wise to Israel`s tactics, and will have to be ready to neutralize them as soon as they arise.