The Best Method to Defend is to Attack. The Main Style of Israeli Foreign Policy

• 02.05.2015, 17:07
• Liana Hovhannisyan
•  Near East,  "Insight" Analytical Center ,  World,  Analytics

At the end of the last year and at the beginning of the current year the developments around Israeli-Palestinian conflict created an impression that the West is going to lose its patience and it will no longer stand, to put it mildly, Israeli non-constructive behavior in negotiations.  Such kind of stance of the West was expressed not only in the official statements made by the US and number of European countries, but also in concrete steps undertaken by them. At the end of last year Sweden recognized the independence of Palestine (the independence of Palestine was recognized by eight EU states: Malts, Cyprus, Czech, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Poland). The Swedish initiative was followed by the symbolic motions passed by Congress in France, Britain and Ireland that urged the recognition of the independence of Palestine. Although those motions had no legal force they aimed at sending a clear message to Israel to restrain from its tough strategy in negotiations.

However, even those concrete steps undertaken by the West were not able to make Israel give up the strategy it has employed since the beginning of the conflict, the logic of which is: "The best method to defend is to attack". The evidence of Israel’s such kind of strategy was the recent order by the country’s government to build 450 additional settlements in the occupied territories of the West Bank. The fact that the Israeli government fully realized that  the consequence of this step could be the country’s isolation by the international community became obvious after the secret letter was leaked to "Yedioth Ahronoth"" news agency. The leaked letter was sent to Israeli diplomatic representatives in different countries by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to notify of possible pressures on Israel, including sanctions, by the international community.

In the continuation of this article the Israeli behavior is to be analyzed in two main contexts:  negotiations between Iran and the six and the upcoming legislative elections in Israel on March 17.

The government of Israel has never tried to hide its negative position on possible progress in the negotiations between Iran and the West, which was perceived as a blow from behind by its allies. If we analyze the decision of government of Israel to build additional 450 settlements in the occupied territories in this context, then it should be stated that by its non-constructive strategy on the negotiation table the Israeli government, like a "spoiled child", wants to attract the attention of his Western allies.

The same logic can also explain the recent crisis in Israeli-US romance; the one which was expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s agreement to have a speech in the US Congress against Obama’s recent statement to veto any resolution presupposing new sanctions towards Iran.  It should be noted that Benjamin Netanyahu was invited to have a speech in the US Congress by the Speaker of the US House of Representatives John Boehner, who represents the opposite Republican Party. The latter invited Israeli Prime Minister without having the US president’s consent, which is a direct violation to the official order of sending invitations in the US government.

If we turn to upcoming legislative election in Israel on March 17 and view the present strategy of the government of Israel in this context, it becomes vivid that on the eve of election Netanyahu’s administration has a problem of proving its society that it will  protect them from internal and external enemies even at the expense of confrontation with the  international community. The present tough tools employed by the Israeli government is done on purpose to prove that only the present stubborn foreign policy is  capable  to guarantee  security of the state of Israel.  This intention of the government was clearly expressed in Netanyahu’s recent declaration in which he particularly stated: "The opposition will not be able to stand the pressure on us", whereas by pressure Netanyahu referred to Iran, Hezbollah and HAMAS.

Conclusively, if we try to give general estimation to  the Israeli present behavior on negotiation table then we are to state that the Israeli present administration continues its long time employed strategy: when the Israeli side feels that its position are weakened on negotiation table, it starts  to violate all possible red lines defined in the negotiation process, for example declaring about its  intention to build additional settlements in occupied territories, having in mind  to restrain from it in the future to sell it as a compromise in the negotiation table.