For now at least the Obama administration has not abandoned its senses or what leverage the U.S. has with regard to Syria:
The Obama administration said Friday it is renewing economic and diplomatic sanctions on Syria, even as two U.S. envoys are in the Syrian capital exploring prospects for improved relations.
[. . .]
“The actions of the government of Syria in supporting terrorism, pursuing weapons of mass destruction and missile programs, and undermining U.S. and international efforts with respect to the stabilization and reconstruction of Iraq pose a continuing unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States,” Obama said in the letter dated Thursday.
Now the question is whether in its “outreach” and “engagement” to Syria the U.S. will demand a change in that objectionable behavior before taking steps to improve relations — by, for example, affording a high level visit or lifting the sanctions. Or, instead, will the Obama team be foolhardy enough to throw out the carrots, hoping for the best and signaling not only to Syria but to Iran and others that no real behavior-modification is required? At least for now, Obama deserves credit for leaving in place the Bush sanctions.
On a less positive note, this report suggests that Israeli officials are more than a bit concerned about the lack of consultation and coordination by U.S. officials. They have a list of complaints:
Senior White House officials told their Israeli counterparts that Obama will demand Netanyahu completely suspend construction in the settlements, the officials said.
“Obama’s people brief their Israeli counterparts in advance much less about security and Middle East policy activities than the Bush administration used to,” the officials said.
In addition, when they do brief Israeli officials, they don’t consult with them or coordinate their statements in advance.
This has caused several coordination “malfunctions” between the two states in the past two months, they said.
The last incident was the statement of Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller, calling on Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The statement had not been coordinated with Israeli officials in charge of the nuclear issue and they heard it first from the media.
There are, it seems, two possible ways to read this. The first is that we may be seeing the lack of co-ordination and gaffe-proclivity that has popped up on everything from the Russian reset button to the chintzy gifts for Gordon Brown. The new U.S. team simply hasn’t gotten its act together and has committed a series of oversights.
The alternative, more troubling explanation is that the U.S. is already signaling a less warm relationship with Israel in an effort to cozy up to the Arab states and begin a process of cajoling and pressuring Israel to offer up concessions. If Netanyahu is to be given an ultimatum on settlements, Israel will have the unlucky distinction as the only country exempt from the “listen, don’t dictate” Obama diplomacy. Perhaps if Israeli leaders threaten or insult the president rather than sing his praises in public they might get the kid glove treatment currently reserved for the likes of Iran and China.
We will have to see. But the “incompetent” explanation does not engender confidence and the fact that the “chilling” explanation seems plausible should worry those who believe that a rift in the U.S.-Israeli relationship benefits neither country.