Harry Kazianis: Trump summit with South Korea president could bring progress in North's denuclearization - Fox News

President Trump and South Korean President Moon Jae-in will meet Thursday at the White House to discuss efforts to convince North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to get rid of his nuclear weapons and long-range missiles and forge a lasting peace with the South and the United States.

Accomplishing this won’t be easy, but it’s not impossible. Dealing with North Korea has been a foreign policy and military nightmare since Korea was split into two nations in 1948 – the communist North aligned with Russia and China, and the South aligned with the U.S.

In fact, we are still technically at war with the North. The Korean War, begun in 1950, ended in 1953 with an armistice rather than a peace treaty. Offering Kim a peace treaty as part of a deal on denuclearization could be one of several incentives to get him to give up his nation’s status as a nuclear power.

TRUMP TO MEET WITH SOUTH KOREA’S MOON IN APRIL, WHITE HOUSE SAYS

Tensions rose considerably between Washington and Pyongyang in the dark days of 2017 when Trump and Kim traded threats of military strikes. But since then the two leaders have met in two summits in a so-far unsuccessful effort to resolve their differences.

Having no diplomatic relations makes things harder, with simple messages taking days to travel between key policymakers in the U.S. and North Korea. Establishing diplomatic relations would be a big win for Kim – and could be another incentive for him to make major concessions on denuclearization.

The good news is that if President Trump is willing to take a small leap of faith, there is a clear path forward that could guarantee a lasting peace on the Korean Peninsula and a real end to the Korean War, ensuring that the nuclear threats of the past remain in the history books.

The good news is that if President Trump is willing to take a small leap of faith, there is a clear path forward that could guarantee a lasting peace on the Korean Peninsula and a real end to the Korean War, ensuring that the nuclear threats of the past remain in the history books.

This is where South Korea’s President Moon can make a difference.

The Moon Miracle, or what many refer to as Seoul’s strategy to facilitate a détente between the U.S. and North Korea, has been transformative.

Moon played a key role in a historically successful Winter Olympics in South Korea last year, three inter-Korean summits, a comprehensive inter-Korean military de-escalation agreement along the Demilitarized Zone, and the normalization of dialogue between the two Koreas.

These successes have done much to ensure the dialogue between Washington and Pyongyang moves forward. In engineering them, Moon has put his own legacy in clear jeopardy, while weakening his own position back home. He will be judged either a great success or an enormous failure, depending on how the North responds to his overtures.

Now we will find out if Moon’s miracle can be truly be sustained. On Thursday he will try to ascertain where President Trump stands on several key issues that could determine the future of relations with North Korea.

First, Moon will seek to figure out if Trump is really committed to a concrete diplomatic negotiation with North Korea, or only willing to deal with the Kim regime if it will surrender its nuclear weapons before getting any relief from economic sanctions.

Next, Moon must find out who is the key decision-maker on Trump’s team when it comes to dealing with North Korea. It is clear that there is not unanimity among Trump’s advisers.

It will be important for Moon to know if National Security Adviser John Bolton – a hardliner on dealing with the North – is just trying to project an image of strength, or whether he is truly the man driving the Trump administration’s negotiation strategy.

If Bolton is in the driver’s seat he will most likely demand what amounts to North Korea’s complete nuclear capitulation for any sort of concessions. A demand like this will most likely result in Kim ending any sort of talks for the foreseeable future.

Assuming Bolton is not driving administration policy, Moon needs to know if Washington is committed to absolutely no sanctions relief until full denuclearization – something that could take a decade or more to achieve – or if there is some middle ground that could be found.

If there is a middle ground, here is where Moon can truly make a difference. Moon should propose a compromise deal to provide limited sanctions relief to the North.

Under such a deal, North Korea would be required to close all facilities at its Yongbyon nuclear complex under international supervision, including a delegation of U.S. nuclear experts. In return, Pyongyang would be granted a temporary suspension of select sanctions.

Some U.N. Security Council resolutions could be suspended and the two Koreas could be allowed to work together on one or two joint economic projects under such a deal. The relaxation of sanctions on specific inter-Korean economic projects could include the linking of railways and roads across the North-South border.

This limited sanctions relief would cost the U.S. very little and be a significant boost to Moon’s separate inter-Korean reconciliation initiative. And it could accelerate the prospects of a peace agreement on the Korean Peninsula.

This play on words – calling the action “a temporary suspension of select sanctions,” matters tremendously and could be the key to a compromise deal.

President Trump would be able to say that he is not dropping any sanctions, at least not formally. Also, the Trump administration could embrace the role of the reasonable adult in the room and offer the North Koreans enough flexibility to prove that its intentions towards peace and denuclearization are more than just talk.

This would allow Washington to grant Pyongyang a key concession while throwing the ball on North Korea’s side of the court to demonstrate its sincerity.

There is, however, one catch to this agreement. The U.S. would need to insist on a snapback provision for sanctions. This way, if the Kim regime does cheat, America and South Korea can reapply sanctions quickly.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

This is a deal President Trump should embrace. Now that any immediate danger from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation has passed, Trump surely would love to change the media narrative and focus the American people’s gaze on something much more positive, especially with the 2020 elections right around the corner.

There is no bigger accomplishment that would allow Trump to claim a real legacy than helping bring real peace to the Korean Peninsula along with denuclearization. Here’s to hoping that the U.S. and South Korean presidents get a real shot at making history, and maybe even a Nobel Peace Prize.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE BY HARRY J. KAZIANIS

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/harry-j-kazianis-trump-summit-with-south-korea-president-could-bring-progress-in-norths-denuclearization

2019-04-11 03:24:02Z
52780266099751

Paul to Pompeo: You do not have ‘permission’ for war with Iran - POLITICO

During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul told Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that “only Congress can declare war.” | Andrew Harnik/AP Photo

Sen. Rand Paul on Wednesday warned the Trump administration not to go to war with Iran, at least not without getting permission from Congress.

The libertarian-leaning Kentucky Republican spoke directly to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Story Continued Below

He asked Pompeo if the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, which allowed for U.S. troops to fight entities responsible for the 9/11 attacks and associated forces, included Iran.

Pompeo declined to directly answer the question, saying he’d defer to lawyers, but stated that there is “no doubt there’s a connection” between the Iranian government and al-Qaeda, the terrorist group behind the 2001 attacks.

“You do not have the permission of Congress to go to war with Iran,” Paul responded, while chiding Pompeo for trying to deflect the question. “Only Congress can declare war.”

Pompeo was testifying before the Republican-controlled committee, a session that came the same week the Trump administration designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization, prompting concerns about future clashes between the U.S. and Iranian-backed forces.

The hearing was supposed to focus on the Trump administration’s proposal to slash the State Department budget by about a fourth.

Lawmakers from both parties have dismissed the Trump administration’s budget proposal, saying it was a non-starter the way past such Trump plans have been. Instead they zoomed in on other subjects, from the administration’s strategy in Venezuela to its struggles to convince North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons.

Pompeo’s appearance also came amid a shake-up in the administration that has seen the ouster of several top officials at the Department of Homeland Security, a department that frequently works with State on issues such as immigration.

Pompeo, a close confidant of Trump whose own position appears safe, echoed President Donald Trump’s insistence that the rise in the number of migrants from Latin America trying to reach the U.S. has resulted in a crisis along the border.

This article tagged under:

Missing out on the latest scoops? Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox.

Show Comments

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/10/pompeo-rand-paul-iran-war-1266526

2019-04-10 15:36:00Z
CAIiECJ0aTRareOfmvcbYPRXfDQqGQgEKhAIACoHCAow4Zn5CjCu8uACMNSiwQU

The E.U. Seems Ready to Put Brexit on Ice. But for How Long? - The New York Times

BRUSSELS — European leaders are coming to Brussels on Wednesday evening as they would go to the dentist — unhappily, but necessarily — to give the embattled British prime minister, Theresa May, another extension on Brexit.

Britain’s scheduled withdrawal from the European Union will be delayed, senior European officials and diplomats say, to avoid a “no-deal” hard Brexit on Friday night. The main discussion will be for how long the extension of the process should last.

The president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, and the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, have suggested an extension until June 1, 2020, diplomats say. If Britain’s Parliament were to pass the withdrawal agreement that the government has negotiated with the bloc any time sooner, the country would leave the bloc on the first of the next month, this proposal goes.

Image

The president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, center left, and the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, have suggested a lengthy extension to the Brexit deadline.CreditEmmanuel Dunand/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

European leaders stressed that, whatever should happen in the process of withdrawal, or Brexit, the British Parliament would still have to pass the withdrawal agreement before there could be any discussions about the future relationship — even if Britain had left without an agreement first. The terms would include the major sticking point for pro-Brexit lawmakers, the so-called backstop to prevent a physical border between Northern Ireland and the south.

The agreement covers technical issues concerning the withdrawal and is not up for renegotiation, European leaders say, while an associated “political declaration” covers things like trade and customs and could serve as the basis for negotiations on the future.

The leaders of the other 27 member states will decide on the length of any extension and other matters late Wednesday night after hearing out Mrs. May. The debate will be mostly over tactics: whether this long extension puts more pressure on Parliament to pass the withdrawal agreement quickly, or whether, as Austria and a handful of other countries believe, an extension just until the end of June would be the best way to accomplish that goal.

Image

The leaders of the other 27 member states will decide on the length of any extension late Wednesday night after hearing out Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain.CreditJack Taylor/Getty Images

“That is a tactical issue and a political decision, and the leaders will come to a decision on that,” a senior European diplomat said. “But no one favors a no-deal Brexit on Friday.”

With any extension under consideration, Britain would have to hold elections for the European Parliament on May 23. Mrs. May has regarded that prospect, three years after the British voted for Brexit, as absurd, but she now accepts it as the inevitable price of avoiding a no-deal Brexit and the damage that would do to her country’s economy.

A central argument for a long extension is that it would relieve European leaders of the burden of constant emergency sessions on Brexit, allowing them to deal with other pressing issues, like migration, the next seven-year budget and the European elections, as well as the choice of a new president for the council, the decision-making body at which the bloc’s heads of government meet; new leaders for the commission, the bloc’s executive arm; and a new central bank head.

Image

European leaders stressed that Britain’s Parliament would still have to pass the withdrawal agreement before there could be any discussions about the future relationship, even if the country left without an agreement first.CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images

One argument against a long extension, which France makes, is that Britain could create difficulties with a new budget and other key issues, since it would remain a member with all of a member’s rights and responsibilities. President Emmanuel Macron is seeking some form of guarantee from Mrs. May that Britain would behave responsibly.

Mr. Macron has suggested quarterly “reviews” of Britain’s behavior during any long extension, which others find difficult legally. But it may be that as a compromise, diplomats suggest, the extension would run only to the end of October.

The idea is to give time for Britain to sort itself out and decide what kind of future relationship it wants. But in any case, European officials emphasize, the withdrawal agreement, including the Irish backstop, designed to guarantee no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, will not change.

There is little expectation in Brussels that Mrs. May’s current negotiations with the opposition Labour Party will come to a positive conclusion, hence the willingness for a long extension. But whether that means the end of Mrs. May’s premiership and new elections is not Europe’s concern, the officials say.

The difference now, in contrast to the last emergency council meeting last month, is that the European leaders have decided to take control over the length of any extension. What might happen at the end of it — including a no-deal Brexit, or a decision to stay in the European Union — would be up to Britain.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/10/world/europe/uk-eu-brexit-extension.html

2019-04-10 17:26:15Z
52780263890891

The E.U. Seems Ready to Put Brexit on Ice. But for How Long? - The New York Times

BRUSSELS — European leaders are coming to Brussels on Wednesday evening as they would go to the dentist — unhappily, but necessarily — to give the embattled British prime minister, Theresa May, another extension on Brexit.

Britain’s scheduled withdrawal from the European Union will be delayed, senior European officials and diplomats say, to avoid a “no-deal” hard Brexit on Friday night. The main discussion will be for how long the extension of the process should last.

The president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, and the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, have suggested an extension until June 1, 2020, diplomats say. If Britain’s Parliament were to pass the withdrawal agreement that the government has negotiated with the bloc any time sooner, the country would leave the bloc on the first of the next month, this proposal goes.

Image

The president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, center left, and the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, have suggested a lengthy extension to the Brexit deadline.CreditEmmanuel Dunand/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

European leaders stressed that, whatever should happen in the process of withdrawal, or Brexit, the British Parliament would still have to pass the withdrawal agreement before there could be any discussions about the future relationship — even if Britain had left without an agreement first. The terms would include the major sticking point for pro-Brexit lawmakers, the so-called backstop to prevent a physical border between Northern Ireland and the south.

The agreement covers technical issues concerning the withdrawal and is not up for renegotiation, European leaders say, while an associated “political declaration” covers things like trade and customs and could serve as the basis for negotiations on the future.

The leaders of the other 27 member states will decide on the length of any extension and other matters late Wednesday night after hearing out Mrs. May. The debate will be mostly over tactics: whether this long extension puts more pressure on Parliament to pass the withdrawal agreement quickly, or whether, as Austria and a handful of other countries believe, an extension just until the end of June would be the best way to accomplish that goal.

Image

The leaders of the other 27 member states will decide on the length of any extension late Wednesday night after hearing out Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain.CreditJack Taylor/Getty Images

“That is a tactical issue and a political decision, and the leaders will come to a decision on that,” a senior European diplomat said. “But no one favors a no-deal Brexit on Friday.”

With any extension under consideration, Britain would have to hold elections for the European Parliament on May 23. Mrs. May has regarded that prospect, three years after the British voted for Brexit, as absurd, but she now accepts it as the inevitable price of avoiding a no-deal Brexit and the damage that would do to her country’s economy.

A central argument for a long extension is that it would relieve European leaders of the burden of constant emergency sessions on Brexit, allowing them to deal with other pressing issues, like migration, the next seven-year budget and the European elections, as well as the choice of a new president for the council, the decision-making body at which the bloc’s heads of government meet; new leaders for the commission, the bloc’s executive arm; and a new central bank head.

Image

European leaders stressed that Britain’s Parliament would still have to pass the withdrawal agreement before there could be any discussions about the future relationship, even if the country left without an agreement first.CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images

One argument against a long extension, which France makes, is that Britain could create difficulties with a new budget and other key issues, since it would remain a member with all of a member’s rights and responsibilities. President Emmanuel Macron is seeking some form of guarantee from Mrs. May that Britain would behave responsibly.

Mr. Macron has suggested quarterly “reviews” of Britain’s behavior during any long extension, which others find difficult legally. But it may be that as a compromise, diplomats suggest, the extension would run only to the end of October.

The idea is to give time for Britain to sort itself out and decide what kind of future relationship it wants. But in any case, European officials emphasize, the withdrawal agreement, including the Irish backstop, designed to guarantee no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, will not change.

There is little expectation in Brussels that Mrs. May’s current negotiations with the opposition Labour Party will come to a positive conclusion, hence the willingness for a long extension. But whether that means the end of Mrs. May’s premiership and new elections is not Europe’s concern, the officials say.

The difference now, in contrast to the last emergency council meeting last month, is that the European leaders have decided to take control over the length of any extension. What might happen at the end of it — including a no-deal Brexit, or a decision to stay in the European Union — would be up to Britain.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/10/world/europe/uk-eu-brexit-extension.html

2019-04-10 14:16:56Z
52780263890891

Israel elections: Netanyahu set for record fifth term as PM - Aljazeera.com

Jerusalem - Israel's incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is on course for a record fifth term, election results show.

Netanyahu has an advantage as nearly all right-wing parties have declared their support to the Israeli leader, Israeli media reported.

The Likud party with the help of other right-wing parties are likely to muster enough support to get a majority in the 120-seat parliament, known as Knesset.

"It is a night of colossal victory," Netanyahu, 69, told supporters at Likud headquarters.

Likud party and the centrist Blue and White party led by Netanyahu's main rival Benny Gantz tied at 97 percent of votes counted. The two main parties won 35 seats apiece.

It is a night of colossal victory

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli PM

Likud, which gained five more seats compared with the 2015 elections, needs 61 seats to form the government.

Netanyahu and his main challenger Gantz were quick to claim victory in the elections.

"The skies may look overcast ... but they cannot conceal the sun of hope that we have brought to the Israeli people and society," Gantz, 59, wrote in an open letter.

United Torah Judaism, Shas, Yisrael Beitenu, Right-wing Union and Kulanu are parties from the right-wing bloc that have passed the 3.25 percent threshold to enter Knesset, obtaining 30 seats combined.

This places the right-wing bloc in a 10-seat lead over the left.

In the centre-left bloc Labor, Meretz and the Arab parties of Hadash-Ta'al and Balad-Ra'am obtained 20 seats.

Despite a low voter turnout among Israeli Palestinians, the Arab lists of Hadash-Ta'al and Balad-Ra'am passed the threshold gaining six and four seats respectively.

However, their total of 10 Knesset seats is lower than in the 2015 elections, when the Arab joint list won 13, making them the third-largest faction in the 20th Knesset.

An hour before voting closed, Israeli Palestinian turnout was at 46 percent, well below the 61 percent turnout nationwide. Palestinian turnout in the 2015 election was 63 percent.

The New Right, Zehut and Gesher parties did not pass the threshold.

190409132945326

Mitchell Barak, an Israeli political pollster and analyst told Al Jazeera it's a remarkable achievement for a party to obtain 35 seats, referring to both frontrunners.

"Gantz has come out of literally nowhere. Four months ago he created a party that is now at least tied for being one of the largest parties today, and bigger than any party has been in recent memory, maybe 10 years or so," Barak said.

However, the biggest mistake for Gantz is that he chose to have a rotation agreement [as prime minister] with Blue and White cofounder Yair Lapid, former finance minister and TV personality.

"Israelis like leaders and they want one leader. They don't want a power sharing arrangement," Barak said.

Barak said that Netanyahu now has plenty of options in forming a coalition. He can partner with the parties from the right-wing bloc or choose to have a national unity government with the Blue and White party.

Once the final results are announced, parties that have made it to the Knesset will submit their recommendations for prime minister to President Reuven Rivlin.

Rivlin will then decide which party leader has the best chance of forming a coalition government, to be determined in a few weeks.

Political analyst Ofer Zalzberg told Al Jazeera that the critical issue is not which party receives the most votes but which party can secure recommendations of 61 Knesset members to form the next government.

Gantz had to generate potential alliances for instance with the ultra-Orthodox or among the former immigrants of the Soviet Union. That's why he made an error when he formed an alliance with Lapid, Zalzberg said.

The message that the Israeli public has sent is very clear. They support him, they support his policies of apartheid, they support his policies of colonisation.

Diana Buttu, a Palestinian analyst

"By merging into a single list with Lapid, he acted in the opposite way. Lapid is a nemesis of the ultra-Orthodox; they wouldn't recommend him as prime minister.

"This rotating [premiership] agreement between Gantz and lapid was ruinous and it assured that the ultra-Orthodox will … recommend Netanyahu."

Although Palestinians living under Israeli military occupation in occupied East Jerusalem, the occupied West Bank and living under Israeli siege in the Gaza Strip do not have voting right in the Israeli elections, it's the Palestinian population that will be most affected by the new government.

Diana Buttu, a Palestinian Haifa-based analyst and former legal adviser to Palestinian peace negotiators, told Al Jazeera that Netanyahu's renewed mandate will allow him to continue his "policies of apartheid, colonisation, and racism".

Buttu said that for as long as Netanyahu has been prime minister, the Palestinian Authority has been urging the international community to intervene during the bombing of Gaza, construction of settlements, demolition of Palestinian homes, passage of the nation-state law and regarding the annexation of the West Bank.

"… [Netanyahu] is ideologically opposed to Palestinian freedom [and] he's going to continue to do whatever he wants against Palestinians," Buttu said.

"The message that the Israeli public has sent is very clear. They support him, they support his policies of apartheid, they support his policies of colonisation and they support a racist."

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/04/israel-elections-netanyahu-set-record-term-pm-190410130916974.html

2019-04-10 13:12:00Z
52780261626840

Netanyahu on cusp of victory after tight Israeli election results - CNN

Netanyahu's right-wing Likud party appeared neck-and-neck with the centrist Blue and White party led by his former chief of staff Benny Gantz. With Israeli media reporting more than 97% of the vote counted, both sides were projected to win 35 seats each.

But based on latest tallies, Netanyahu looked to have a clearer path back to power. A Likud-led bloc could secure 65 places in the 120-strong Knesset by combining seats won by the two ultra-orthodox religious parties, which both polled well, with those of smaller right-wing parties.

A center-left bloc led by Gantz and supported by the Arab parties would only muster 55 seats.

Gantz admitted that Netanyahu held the advantage. The "odds may not seem in our favor," he said in a note to party colleagues Wednesday morning, although he insisted the results "tell an unfinished story."

Netanyahu claimed victory Tuesday night. "The right-wing bloc led by the Likud won a clear victory. I thank the citizens of Israel for the trust. I will start forming a right-wing government with our natural partners as soon as tonight," Netanyahu said.

The electoral picture could change if some of the smaller right-wing parties decided to support Gantz, a move observers say is unlikely. The votes of diplomats abroad and soldiers are yet to be counted.

If Netanyahu secures his cherished fifth term, he will become Israel's longest-serving leader in the summer, overtaking David Ben-Gurion, the country's founder.

Officially, it's up to Israel's President, Reuven Rivlin, to decide who is tasked with forming the next government. Rivlin will announce his decision after consulting with the heads of the political parties that have secured enough votes to enter the Knesset. These consultations take a few days, and the President is likely to announce his decision in about a week.

In the final days of the campaign, Netanyahu veered sharply to the right, pledging to annex West Bank settlements if re-elected, and warning his voter base that the end of his strong right-wing government would signal the beginning of a weak left-wing government.

Netanyahu fought the election in the face of looming indictments for bribery and breach of trust offenses, which he sought to portray as a witch-hunt led by left-wing elites and fed by the media. The date for a final hearing in the case is yet to be set.

At first, Netanyahu faced a diverse array of opponents. But then three former army chiefs come together with a TV news anchor-turned-politician to create the Blue and White party, named after the colors of the Israeli flag. Led by Gantz, a former head of the army under Netanyahu, Blue and White's polling numbers surged, and the election quickly became a two-horse race.

Netanyahu -- known to supporters and detractors alike as "Bibi" -- focused on burnishing his status as a global player with close ties to both the President of the United States and the President of Russia.

In a visit to Washington made by Netanyahu during the campaign, Donald Trump signed a proclamation recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, in defiance of the overwhelming international consensus. And in the election's closing days, on a visit to Moscow, Netanyahu was able to personally thank Vladimir Putin for Russia's key role in locating the body of an Israeli soldier who had been missing in Lebanon for nearly 37 years.

With his victory all but certain, attention will now turn to the corruption case. The Supreme Court will rule on whether Netanyahu can continue in office if he is charged.

For his part, Netanyahu has denied any wrongdoing.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/10/middleeast/israel-election-results-benjamin-netanyahu-benny-gantz-intl/index.html

2019-04-10 11:55:00Z
52780261626840

Israeli election results: Benjamin Netanyahu reelected prime minister - Vox.com

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has managed to hold on to power, winning what will be a record fifth term in office despite having faced a bruising reelection fight.

The preliminary results from Israel’s Tuesday election have Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party getting 35 seats out of a total 120 seats in the Knesset (Israel’s parliament). While Likud didn’t win an outright majority of seats, that’s typical in Israeli elections.

Party leaders generally become prime ministers by cobbling together a parliamentary majority with the help of smaller parties. In this case, a group of smaller right-wing parties expected to back Netanyahu seems to have captured 65 seats, enough to give him a 10 seat majority over the rival center-left bloc (the exact numbers could change as the remaining two percent of votes are tallied).

Netanyahu is now set to be the longest-serving prime minister in Israeli history — even longer than David Ben-Gurion, the country’s first prime minister often described as “Israel’s George Washington.” And the ramifications of his fifth term could be enormous, both for the health of Israeli democracy and the fate of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The prime minister is facing a pending criminal indictment on bribery and fraud charges by Israel’s attorney general that’s likely to come down later this year. And now that Netanyahu has all but secured a victory, it’s possible his coalition could pass legislation protecting him from prosecution while in office, in essence letting him get away with his alleged crimes for the time being.

What’s more, Netanyahu made a stunning last-minute campaign promise over the weekend to annex Jewish settlements in the West Bank if re-elected — extending full Israeli sovereignty over settlements widely considered illegal under international law. If he follows through, it would be the most radical rejection of a negotiated two-state solution by any Israeli prime minister in modern history. It would also generate a massive crisis both for Israel and the broader Middle East.

In sum, this is a very, very big deal.

The story of Netanyahu’s victory is pretty simple: Israel is a center-right country, and Netanyahu rallied enough right-wing voters to defeat the center.

Since the collapse of the peace process in the early 2000s and the rise of the Hamas government in Gaza after Israel’s withdrawal from the territory, the Israeli public has drifted further and further toward skepticism about peace and the outside world.

Political scientists have documented strong evidence that rocket attacks and suicide bombings lead to increased vote shares for right-wing parties, suggesting that the unending Palestinian conflict has led to a complete collapse of support for Israel’s left-wing peace camp.

Labor, the center-left party that dominated Israeli politics for the country’s first 50 years of existence, hasn’t won an election since 1999. The preliminary results have them winning a dismal six seats this time around.

Netanyahu’s past 10 years in office, and especially the last four, are both a consequence and a cause of this right-wing drift.

Since 2009, the prime minister has become more and more right wing in a bid to protect his flank from other right-wing challengers, a strategy that’s both substantively dangerous and politically effective.

Under the prime minister’s leadership, policies that would not have been considered in the past — like the annexation of part of the West Bank or a law defining Israel as a “Jewish” nation-state in a fashion that excludes the country’s sizable Arab minority — have either been proposed or enacted.

The leading opposition to Netanyahu this time around wasn’t a leftist party, but rather a new centrist party, Blue and White (named for the colors of the Israeli flag). Led by Benny Gantz, a retired general and former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, the party aimed to dodge the kind of weak-on-security attacks that Netanyahu had long deployed against left-wing rivals.

Gantz ran a campaign that focused heavily on his security credentials and staffed the top tier of his party with other ex-military men. But his tough-guy positioning evidently wasn’t compelling enough to overcome Netanyahu and his Likud party’s appeal.

Netanyahu’s campaign focused on his own long record of guiding Israel through conflict and security crises, but also on his close relationships with right-wing, nationalist leaders like Brazilian President Jair Bolsanaro and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Of these global Netanyahu friends, one was especially important: President Donald Trump. Not only is the US Israel’s closest ally, but under Trump the US both moved its embassy to Jerusalem and, just before the election, recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights — both unprecedented moves that were big wins for Netanyahu.

Likud’s strong performance was buoyed by the success of a number of smaller religious and conservative parties, including one party — United Right — that includes one faction so far-right and anti-Arab that observers have characterized it as “fascist.”

Netanyahu also benefitted from what looks like a collapse in turnout among Israel’s Arab minority, who were vital to the hopes of the broader left. It’s hard to say yet why this happened, but it’s worth noting that Likud activists tried to smuggle cameras in to document alleged “election fraud” by Arab voters on the day of the vote. Hadash Ta’al, the leading Arab party, saw it as an attempt to menace their voters and deter them from voting — one that may have been effective, especially coming on the heels of a campaign that relentlessly marginalized Arab voters.

“The anti-Arab tone has been a constant backdrop to the election campaign and even Netanyahu’s opponents are afraid to challenge it,” writes Anshel Pfeffer, a columnist and reporter at Israel’s left-wing Haaretz newspaper.

First, Netanyahu needs to figure out exactly which parties he’s going to include in his coalition.

He could reach out to Gantz to try to form a more centrist national unity coalition, but his post-election comments suggest he won’t do that. Instead, he seems likely to work with almost exclusively right-wing parties to build a hard-right majority. The exact set-up of this government will be decided in the coming month or so.

After that’s all sorted out, the most immediate issue will be the looming indictment. Netanyahu is expected to try to build support for a proposed law that would immunize him from prosecution while in office. If he fails and the indictment comes down this summer as expected, his coalition could very well fracture under the pressure — leading to a new Likud prime minister or potentially new elections.

Netanyahu’s electoral victory, in other words, doesn’t mean he’s out of the woods yet.

“This is one station in a journey Netanyahu is going to go through in the next few months,” says Natan Sachs, director of the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution think tank in Washington. “The real game is about the indictment: whether he gets immunity from it, whether he can survive indictment and keep the coalition going even while on trial — those are the real questions.”

The second big question is about Netanyahu’s promise to begin annexing West Bank settlements.

It’s hard to overstate how significant this move would be if Netanyahu follows through with it. Israel would be asserting permanent control over land most countries on the planet believe belongs to the Palestinians. It would immediately cause a rupture in Israel’s relations with many countries around the world, potentially even Arab dictatorships that have been quietly working with Israel against Iran.

And for Palestinians, it would be catastrophic.

“Such a move would likely signal the death knell of the two-state solution and move Israel closer to a formal apartheid reality on the ground,” says Khaled Elgindy, a senior fellow at Brookings.

The fate of these two big issues, indictment immunity and West Bank annexation, could also be linked. It’s conceivable that Netanyahu could trade annexation for immunity: offer hard-right parties a guarantee that annexation will happen if they vote to pass an immunity bill.

If that happens, it would be a double disaster for Israel: Not only would the prime minister be shielding himself from facing justice for the foreseeable future, undermining a basic tenet of democratic accountability, he’d also be moving toward turning what’s supposed to be a temporary occupation of Palestinian land into permanent seizure.

This would be a move both toward authoritarianism and apartheid.

It’s not yet clear if that dire scenario will come to pass. But Netanyahu’s victory means the threat both to Israeli democracy and Palestinian freedom is higher than ever before.

Alexia Underwood contributed reporting to this piece.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.vox.com/world/2019/4/10/18302233/israel-election-results-benjamin-netanyahu-2019

2019-04-10 12:19:13Z
52780261626840