Last Wednesday evening, Benjamin Netanyahu had no intention of including his willingness to hold talks for the two-state solution as part of his next government's fundamental policy. If Yair Lapid and Tzipi Livni do not insist on the worn-out, volatile formula, it will be discussed only after President Barack Obama lands in Israel in March. Netanyahu's speech at Bar-Ilan University in 2009 will be reiterated. It's not enough to resume talks with the Palestinians. For some time, the Prime Minister's Office has been preparing for an onslaught of heavy international pressure from the West. On Wednesday, Barak Ravid and Chaim Levinson of Haaretz reported that Yaakov Amidror and Isaac Molho, concerned over the deterioration of Israel's diplomatic status, discussed the need to hold back construction in the settlements and even to suspend it temporarily in exchange for resuming talks with the Palestinians. Although Obama announced that he would come to the Middle East without a new peace plan, the very fact of his presence adds to the pressure on Israel to slow settlement construction. That is another reason for the careful effort by Likud-Yisrael Beytenu officials, headed by coalition negotiators David Shimron, Moshe Lion and Yoav Mani, to bring Lapid and Livni into the government. It is also an appropriate reason, mainly since the composition of the Likud faction in the 19th Knesset is more right-wing than in the past and Western diplomats are concerned over the strengthening of Habayit Hayehdi, even if Naftali Bennett has no intention of breaking up the coalition before a proposal to establish a Palestinian state is actually made. While the resumption of the talks with Mahmoud Abbas is one of the major reasons for Obama's upcoming visit to the Middle East, it is not the only one. The collapse of Bashar Assad is long in coming; Turkey is becoming more violent in its verbal threats; Iran, as it loses Syria, is sending its long arm toward Egypt. Under such conditions, how will the American administration keep its promise to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power? The announcement of Obama's intention to visit Israel is also a slight correction of his mistake in skipping a visit to Israel when he made his Cairo speech, in the wake of which the Arab Spring took place and, for now, opened Egypt's gates to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Under such circumstances, a meeting with Netanyahu in Jerusalem seems almost de rigueur. One does not need an overactive imagination to assume that it will begin with a certain amount of awkwardness, an alienation whose direction is unknown after all that was said in the media about the relationship between the two leaders during their respective election campaigns. But policy continues as it was, and officials in Jerusalem believe that the president's current term will be more difficult for Israel than his previous one. The common interpretation in Israel, that Obama's visit will help Netanyahu to form a coalition government quicker, is correct. Another possibility is that the news of Obama's upcoming visit will raise the price that Yesh Atid and Kadima can ask for their inclusion in the coalition. A matter of time Before Obama's visit, the Institute for National Security Studies published its strategic assessment for the coming year. Amos Yadlin, former head of IDF military intelligence and the head of the institute, said in his summary that if Iran continues enriching uranium at its current pace, by summer 2013 it will cross the red line that Benjamin Netanyahu drew during his graphic speech at the U.N. Then Iran will be four to six months away from the ability to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Iran's ability to achieve a breakthrough in its quest for nuclear arms is the litmus test that determines the necessity of military action against it. Yadlin feels that if the Americans succeed in turning back the clock, putting off the Iranians' capability of manufacturing a nuclear bomb by two years, the diplomatic objective will be won and there will be no need for military action. During Obama's upcoming visit, Netanyahu will ask for proof of Obama's promise to keep Iran from manufacturing a nuclear bomb. Is Yadlin's formula enough? The recently announced increase in the number of centrifuges will not reduce Israel's concern. There are many indications that the U.S. has softened its stance toward Iran, as shown by its attempts to engage Iran in dialogue. It is possible that Israel's next government may deal with the matter less. Benny Begin, Ehud Barak and Dan Meridor, who spoke about it a great deal, will not be among the chosen nine of Netanyahu's inner forum of advisers. Moshe Yaalon remains, to be joined by Gideon Sa'ar, Gilad Erdan, Silvan Shalom and Tzahi Hanegbi. It is too early to guess how the committee that manages Israel's security will shape up. But Netanyahu, who has been dealing with the subject for many years, would do well to concern himself with another threatening aspect that will show a tacit understanding between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Obama. The American president promised to stop Iran from producing a nuclear bomb. Officials in Tehran know the significance of this promise by the president, but Obama will become a private citizen in another four years. For its own good, Iran will allow him to complete his term without storing a nuclear bomb in its cellar. But it will obtain that nuclear bomb between the 2016 elections and the new president's entry into the White House in early 2017. It is greatly feared that the wolf will devour the lamb at the time convenient to both of the major players in the international arena.
