To the editor:
It's interesting that in their article, "Obama and Netanyahu: A Story of Slights and Crossed Signals," by Peter Baker and Jodi Rudoren, almost all the slights and crossed signals, including the initial ones which put everything off kilter, came from President Obama and his administration. No wonder American relations with our most important ally and only real and enduring friend in the Middle East have become somewhat frayed and no wonder America's problems in that important region have been so damaged since President Obama took office.
There were, unfortunately, a number of errors and misleading items in the article. For example:
The authors refer to Netanyahu "denouncing the president's efforts" on the Iran deal, but Netanyahu wasn't denouncing Obama's efforts; he was criticizing the result of those efforts, a deal which most of the American public and most of Congress recognize is worse than no deal and which even most of those in Congress who did not vote against it criticized as deeply flawed.
(The article also made no mention of the recent letter from Iran's supreme leader to its president which effectively gutted the agreement.)
The article refers to former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak as having "been a friend of the Israelis." This was hardly the case. When Yasser Arafat launched his terror offensive after rejecting peace, including the establishment of a Palestinian state in virtually all the disputed territories, Mubarak effectively encouraged that terror offensive by recalling Egypt's ambassador to Israel. He was also effectively complicit in Hamas' smuggling of weapons to Gaza through Egypt. Mubarak also was not much of a friend to America. What was shocking and disheartening to Israel and to all America's allies in the Middle East was the way President Obama threw Mubarak under the bus in favor of the radical Muslim Brotherhood which was far more hostile to both America and Israel.
The authors falsely refer to Netanyahu "settling a dispute with Turkey at Mr. Obama's request." This was yet another example of Netanyahu doing something which was probably unwise in an attempt to appease President Obama. At the president's request, he called the then Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and apologized for Turkish casualties on the Mavi Marmara. The hope was that Erdogan would agree to end the dispute, but he never did. In a just world, it would be Erdogan who should be apologizing to Netanyahu, since he was the one who initiated the hostilities and it was the armed combatants he sent on that ship who attacked the Israelis.
The article misleadingly credit John Kerry with "persuading the Israelis and Palestinians to agree to negotiations." However, not persuading was needed with the Israelis, who have been pleading for negotiations since Abbas walked away in 2008. Omitted was the key fact that in yet another example of one-sided, counterproductive pressure, Kerry pressured Netanyahu to release scores of Arab terrorists, including several mass murderers, to induce Abbas to reluctantly pretend to negotiate for a few months.
The authors say "the new process eventually collapsed." It didn't collapse; Mahmoud Abbas torpedoed it.
The authors refer to Obama striking "a deal to eliminate Syria's chemical arsenal," but fair to mention that Syria didn't adhere to the deal and has since used chemical weapons.
They also refer to Netanyahu walking back his comments about there not being a Palestinian Arab state during his tenure and about Arab Israeli voters tilting the elections, but he didn't walk them back; he simply tried to clarify them for those who, deliberately or otherwise, were publicly misrepresenting them.
The article is also incorrect in saying the Iran deal has been finalized, as is clear from the content of Khomeini's letter to Rouhani.
Sincerely,
Alan Stein