U.S. President Barack Obama was set to meet Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Monday, just days after Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon spoke to Channel 2 about the futility of holding talks with the Palestinians. Ya'alon's comments were not out of the ordinary. He reiterated his long-held view that the talks run by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry would not culminate in anything concrete. In a democracy, defense chiefs normally withhold judgment on matters that are within the purview of the prime minister and the justice minister (who has been appointed to lead the talks.) But in Israel, every cabinet member can talk about anything, including on matters that are not germane to his or her ministry. As such, Ya'alon's comments were not so outlandish. But if Ya'alon's interview is scrutinized further, one can see that there is a problem. Ya'alon says Kerry made empty promises, telling Abbas he could offer something he could not deliver. There is no doubt that Ya'alon's assertion is dramatic. But Ya'alon, who was motivated by a desire to share this insight with the public at large, should have asked Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a green light before uttering those words. Did Netanyahu give the green light? Netanyahu has so far invoked his right to remain silent. Ya'alon's comments have another dimension altogether. By conducting this interview ahead of the Abbas-Obama summit he gave the Palestinian leader diplomatic fodder to make his case. After listening to Ya'alon, Obama could decide that he and Kerry must close ranks and embrace the Palestinian stance. Israel has nothing to gain from a clash with Kerry or with Obama, even if the disagreements have yet to be resolved. You cannot impeach Kerry's credibility and still expect him to revert to his original view that the Palestinians must heed to Netanyahu's demand and recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. Ya'alon, like Netanyahu and many others in the opposition and the coalition, believes Abbas does not want a deal. Both sides are now jockeying for the day after the talks collapse, hoping Western governments and public opinion polls will not point a finger at them. In that regard, Ya'alon's comments could mean Israel has already lost the upcoming blame game. The reality on the ground is very different and must be properly evaluated. Kerry has come to understand the importance of the Israeli demand. If the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state, they essentially will have waived their right to make new demands once a deal is signed. They also will have conceded that there is no "right of return" for the descendants of the 1948 Palestinian refugees. So why has Kerry backtracked? Why does he no longer support the Israeli demand? Was he pressured by Arab regimes? Israel must be prepared to pursue a policy of an eye for an eye on that front, meaning: pressure will be met with counterpressure. Just like the Americans and the West have consistently insisted that Israel stop settlement construction, they should have maintained their support for Israel's demand. Why has Kerry's support for the Palestinian cause been rock solid and why has he been such a weakling when it comes to holding his ground on his pro-Israeli position- Let's hope Obama won't throw his support behind Abbas just because the U.S. is displeased with some Israeli ministers and their views. He may have demands from Israel and he may have expressed them publicly and behind closed doors, but he still has to make Abbas realize that his continued rejectionism has had a prohibitive cost on the talks.
