America, Israel and Iran

RARELY have relations between an American president and an Israeli prime minister sunk so low. No sooner had Binyamin Netanyahu won the Israeli election, on March 17th, than Barack Obama told him he would “reassess” relations with the Jewish state. Mr Netanyahu, says the president, has all but destroyed his credibility and the chances for peace with Palestinians, and he has eroded Israel’s democracy.

These are strong words coming from Israel’s best friend. The mood has not been this bad since 1991, when the elder George Bush delayed loan guarantees to Israel; or maybe 1956, when Dwight Eisenhower forced Israel (and Britain and France) to withdraw after the intervention against Egypt.

Mr Obama was right to chastise Mr Netanyahu over Palestine. But he should not ignore him altogether. This is a vital moment in the Middle East. Mr Obama may this week embrace Israel’s greatest foe, Iran, by agreeing on the outline for a nuclear deal. As cynical as Mr Netanyahu may be about Palestine, he deserves to be heard on the risk that a deal will turn Iran from a pariah into a legitimate and overbearing regional power.

Not pally on Palestine

Mr Netanyahu prompted this breakdown during his election campaign. He declared that a Palestinian state would never be created on his watch, repudiating his acceptance in 2009 of peace based on two states. On election day he urged his supporters to rush to vote because Arab citizens of Israel were turning out “in droves”. His flirtation with Arab-hatred was disturbing for Mr Obama, for liberal-minded supporters of Israel (see Lexington) and, indeed, for this newspaper.

Mr Netanyahu has recalibrated his remarks. He says he has not given up on a Palestinian state, though conditions must change first. He claims his comments on Arab voters were misunderstood and has issued an apology. That is welcome, though he still has much work to do before he will be believed.

But rather than dying down, the spat worsened. Anonymous American officials leaked news that Israel has been treacherously spying on them during the Iran talks and briefing Congress—a charge Israel denies. For a president as self-controlled as Mr Obama, the vehemence towards Mr Netanyahu has a stage-managed quality. So why the drama, Obama?

The suspicion is that Mr Obama wants to blunt Mr Netanyahu’s criticism of an Iran deal, or to besmirch him as a racist, so as to stop wavering Democrats from joining the many who cheered Mr Netanyahu in Congress when he denounced the looming agreement as “a very bad deal”.

Mr Netanyahu is wrong to reject any plausible deal with Iran. His confrontational tactics may do great damage to his country. Yet he is right on at least one point that Mr Obama is wilfully ignoring: Iran’s belligerent behaviour in the Middle East is an increasing menace.

As we show (see article), the militias Iran is sponsoring are in some ways the Shia mirror-image of the Sunni jihadists of Islamic State (IS). As the Arab world breaks down, Iran’s proxies are not just a response to the sectarian chaos but also a cause of it. This week Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels laid siege to the strategic port of Aden and Saudi Arabia, at the head of a ten-nation coalition, launched attacks to repel them (see article). Iran now has strong influence over Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad and Sana’a. Mr Obama has chosen not to speak out much against this—in the chaos of Iraq his aircraft have just begun to help Iranian-backed forces attack IS in Tikrit.

Iranian aggressiveness does not mean abandoning the nuclear talks. An agreement that freezes Iran’s nuclear programme for a decade is better than none at all. Perhaps, with time and engagement, Iran itself might change. With a more tractable Iran, other problems in the Middle East would become easier for the outside world to manage.

But Mr Netanyahu is right to point out that nobody should count on it. Free of sanctions, Iran may become more assertive still. To sell his deal, Mr Obama must explain how he can work with a foe, and not a hoped-for friend. In the cold war the West confronted and contained the Soviet Union even as it struck pragmatic arms-control deals. Mr Obama needs to make the case that, with Iran, the West will distrust and verify.

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21647292-although-barack-obama-right-chastise-binyamin-netanyahu-israels-prime-minister-has-point