jeudi 8 novembre 2012

Netanyahou interdit à ses ministres de parler d'Obama après que certains l'aient accusé de s'être mêlé des élections états-uniennes... C'est peu dire


C'est qu'il tente de se faire pardonner et d'éviter la vengeance d'Obama après avoir appuyé Romney, son ami et ancien partenaire d'affaire.


PM to ministers: Don’t talk about Obama

Following series of undiplomatic statements by Likud MKs, Netanyahu orders party’s lawmakers not to comment on US president’s re-election without coordinating statements with his office
ynet 
US President Barack Obama’s re-election was celebrated almost everywhere around the world Wednesday, while in Israel members of the Likud party rushed to expressed their disappointment, some publicly and some anonymously.
Following the negative responses, Ynet has learned, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered all of his party’s ministers and Knesset members to avoid commenting on Obama’s re-election without coordinating their statements with the Prime Minister’s Office.
Knesset Member Danny Danon was one of the first to express his disappointment with the election results, saying that Obama cannot be trusted. “The State of Israel will not surrender to Obama. We have no one to rely on but ourselves,” he argued.
Another Likud lawmaker said that “Obama is not good for Israel and we’re concerned that he will try to pressure Israel into making concessions because of his chilly relationship with Netanyahu.”
According to a senior Likud official, the Prime Minister’s Office was alarmed by the negative reactions to Obama’s re-election, which could intensify the cold relationship between the two leaders – and therefore decided to begin damage control and prevent uncoordinated responses.
On Wednesday afternoon, the ministers’ spokespersons and advisors received text messages from Netanyahu’s office, asking them not to comment about Obama’s re-election. The Likud spokespersons were requested to stick with the statements issued by Netanyahu’s office.
During the US election campaign, Netanyahu took a stand which many in the political system saw as gross intervention in America’s internal affairs. He hosted Republican candidate Mitt Romney in Israel and was even included in the Republican Party’s election ads.
Interior Minister Eli Yishai, chairman of the Shas party, was the first minister to admit Wednesday that Obama’s re-election did not benefit Netanyahu. “This is probably not a very good morning for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,” Yishai said during a local authority spokespersons’ conference in Eilat.
Asked whether Israel was wrong to intervene in the US elections, he responded: “I don’t know if Israel interfered in the elections or not, but in general we should not interfere in elections taking place in another country.”
President Shimon Peres, who is visiting Russia, was also asked whether did not damage Israel’s relationship with the US by interfering in the American election campaign.
“There are many wise people in Israel and there are many people who think differently. I prefer to be part of the right minority than of the wrong majority,” the president replied.
Former Kadima Chairwoman Tzipi Livni wrote on her Facebook page that she congratulates Obama, “who moved America once again. The US has put its future in Obama’s hands, and that means a lot as far as we are concerned as well.
“Israel’s security is based on the strategic relations between Israel and the US, which are also built on the trust between leaders that is missing today. Self-examination and deep reparation are required.”


USISraelrelationship

JERUSALEM — Le gouvernement israélien se retrouvait jeudi sur la défensive, l'opposition et les commentateurs évoquant l'hypothèse d'une "vengeance" du président Barack Obama en raison des sympathies affichées par Benjamin Netanyahu en faveur du candidat républicain perdant Mitt Romney.
Le ministre des Finances Youval Steinitz, un proche de M. Netanyahu, a tenté de réfuter les accusations d'ingérence du Premier ministre israélien dans la campagne présidentielle américaine.
"Nous ne nous sommes pas immiscés dans les élections américaines, nous avons été très prudents", a affirmé M. Steinitz à la radio publique.
"Ceux qui colportent de fausses informations sur une intervention israélienne dans le scrutin portent atteinte aux intérêts d'Israël", a-t-il accusé en visant notamment l'ancien Premier ministre centriste Ehud Olmert.
M. Olmert, qui envisage un retour en politique pour les élections législatives du 22 janvier, a estimé qu'en prenant parti, M. Netanyahu a "violé les règles de base qui régissent les relations entre États", selon des propos tenus devant la communauté juive de New-York rapporté par des médias israéliens.
La dirigeante du Meretz, un parti d'opposition de gauche, Zehava Galon, a renchéri en fustigeant "l'intervention grossière de Benjamin Netanyahu dans les élections américaines", parlant d'un "pari irresponsable".
M. Netanyahu, cité par la radio, a dû s'expliquer: "Certaines voix parmi nous tentent de provoquer un conflit avec les États-Unis, mais elles n'y parviendront pas. Je continuerai à travailler étroitement avec le président Obama pour défendre les intérêts d'Israël", a-t-il assuré.
MM. Netanyahu et Romney, des conservateurs libéraux, partagent des affinités idéologiques encore renforcées par l'appartenance du républicain à l'Eglise mormone, traditionnelle soutien de la droite nationaliste israélienne.
L'ambassadeur des États-Unis en Israël, Dan Shapiro, s'est efforcé d'apaiser la polémique en qualifiant de "ridicule" l'idée d'un "désir de vengeance" du président réélu.
Le prix à payer
Les analystes israéliens s'interrogent néanmoins sur le "prix" que Barack Obama pourrait faire payer à M. Netanyahu à un peu plus de deux mois d'un scrutin crucial.
"Netanyahu a parié et nous allons payer", résume le tabloïd Yédiot Aharonot.
Même son de cloche à gauche, au Haaretz: "Obama a maintenant quatre ans pour régler ses comptes avec Netanyahu, pour le soutien ouvert à Mitt Romney, pour ses dépréciations (d'Obama) devant le Congrès, pour le gel des négociations avec les Palestiniens, pour la colonisation et pour avoir tenté de lui faire la leçon sur le dossier iranien".
Le premier test de l'humeur entre l'Américain et l'Israélien pourrait avoir lieu très prochainement, à l'occasion de la demande de rehaussement du statut de la Palestine au rang d'État non-membre à l'ONU.
"Netanyahu espère que les Américains vont presser Mahmoud Abbas de renoncer à ce projet, mais le président américain demandera en échange que le Premier ministre fassent preuve de souplesse envers les Palestiniens", a pronostiqué le commentateur politique de la radio publique.
La deuxième test devrait porter sur le programme nucléaire iranien controversé.
Selon plusieurs commentateurs, Barack Obama pourrait tenter de négocier un accord avec Téhéran sans fixer de limite de temps tandis que M. Netanyahu ne cesse d'accuser l'Iran de procrastination.
En septembre, M. Netanyahu a réclamé à hauts cris mais en vain à la Maison Blanche d'imposer à l'Iran "des lignes rouges claires" à ne pas dépasser dans son programme nucléaire, en menaçant de frapper préventivement les installations atomiques iraniennes.
Mais il s'est heurté à une fin de non-recevoir --au propre comme au figuré-- du président américain qui, comme le reste de la communauté internationale, privilégie à ce stade un durcissement des sanctions contre l'Iran.
Copyright © 2012 AFP. Tous droits réservés.





Olmert: Netanyahu interfered in U.S. elections for Sheldon Adelson


Speaking to U.S. Jewish leaders, the former PM, who is considering a return to politics, says Netanyahu might not have 'a friend in the White House' after he publicly backed Republican nominee Romney.
By | Nov.07, 2012 | 6:57 PM | 40
 
Following U.S. President Barack Obama's victory in the American presidential elections, on Wednesday former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of blatantly interfering in favor of Republican nominee Mitt Romney, adding that he did so in the name of Netanyahu and Romney-backer Sheldon Adelson.

"This represents a significant breach of the basic rules governing ties between nations, made worse by the fact that these are allies like Israel and the United States," Olmert said during a meeting with the heads of New York's Jewish community. 

Olmert, who's weighing whether or not to make a return to politics and run in the upcoming elections opposite Netanyahu, was asked by one of those attending the meeting whether or not the Israeli public was disturbed by the fact that the premier intervened in the U.S. presidential campaign.

"The prime minister has a right to prefer one candidate over another," Olmert said, adding, however, that it was "better, obviously, if he kept it to himself. What took place this time was a breaking of all the rules, when our prime minister intervened in the U.S. elections in the name of an American billionaire with a clear interest in the vote."   

During the U.S. presidential elections, Adelson donated over $100 million to Romney's campaign, announcing that it was his goal to take Obama out of the White House. "The very same billionaire used Israel's prime minister to advance a nominee of his own for president," Olmert told Jewish leaders in New York.

Referring to Obama's overnight victory, the former premier congratulated the American president, saying that he "was a friend to Israel before he was re-elected, and he shall remain a friend of Israel now."

According to Olmert, Israel-U.S. ties are based on joint values, but that the level of trust between the American president and the Israeli prime minister is of great significance in this matter.

"Following what Netanyahu did in the last few months, raises the question whether or not our prime minister has a friend in the White House" Olmert said. 

"I'm not sure," he added. "This may be very significant for us at critical junctures. Unfortunately, Netanyahu turned Israel from a topic that was beyond all dispute in the American elections, to an issue at the center of a debate."




Obama wins, Netanyahu loses
The Israeli Prime Minister threw his full support behind Mitt Romney. Will the president make him pay? VIDEO


JERUSALEM — President Barack Obama's decisive victory provoked a day of political ricochets in Israel, which faces elections of its own in just under two and a half months.
In Jerusalem Tel Aviv, the day after the elections felt a bit like it does when a cousin delivers bombshell news at a family reunion, with eruptions of frenzy and concern.
There were those, like esteemed Ha'aretz columnist Chemi Shalev, who wagged their fingers in slightly reproachful I-told-you-so's. No one had been fully honest about the Republican campaign, he said.
"Nowhere was the blatant disregard for facts, for reality and for a sense of proportion more evident than in the hypocrisy and hyperbole so cynically employed in order to try and depict Obama as some sort of latter day Haman who seeks to undermine Israel, if not to destroy the Jewish people completely," he wrote. "Many millions of dollars were wasted in a futile effort to wrest away a few percentage points of Jewish voters away from the Democrats and into the Republican camp."
The result? Almost 70 percent of Jewish support for Obama.
In Israel, a shadowy organization called IvoteIsrael claimed that an exit poll showed 85 percent of Israel's expat American voters, more than 100,000 strong, supported Mitt Romney.
But further investigation revealed that the so-called exit poll was in fact comprised of stubs left in drop-boxes strategically installed in religious neighborhoods. And IvoteIsrael, upon investigation, appears to have ties to a Republican operative in the United States.
In Israel, the assumption that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sided with Romney has become axiomatic.
There were those, such as Interior Minister Eli Yishai, who lost no time in rejoicing in this prime minister's misfortune.
"It seems it is not such a good morning for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu," Yishai told reporters early first thing Wednesday morning.
Others, who may themselves be jockeying for Netanyahu's job, lost no time in attacking the prime minister for playing favorites with Romney.
In an unusually blunt statement on Israel Army Radio, former ambassador Dan Kurtzer scolded Netanyahu for "unecessarily endorsing Romney — something unprecendented — and causing tension in relations between the two nations. He shouldn't have done it. There was no reason for this."
Meeting with the Jewish Federation of New York, former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert leveled a sharply worded analysis of Netanyahu's actions, saying that Netanyahu intervened in the American elections on behalf of "an American billionaire" with a clear interest in the race. (Hint: His name is Sheldon Adelson.)
"That same billionaire used the prime minister to promote his own presidential candidate. This is a serious violation of the basic bilateral rules, especially when it comes to allies such as Israel and the US," Olmert said.
The prime minister has the right to an opinion, Olmert specified, "but it's better if he kept it to himself."
"Obama was a friend of Israel before he was elected and will remain so now," Olmert continued. But "after what Netanyahu has done in the past few months — we have to ask whether the prime minister has a friend in the White House. I'm not sure."
In a similar vein, opposition leader Shaul Mofaz, who has seen the fortunes of his Kadima party plummet since elections were announced, sent a congratulatory letter to Obama and said on Israeli Radio that Netanyahu had jeopardized Israel's ties with its closest ally.
It is Israel, so everyone had an opinion. Some analysts hoped Obama would parlay the victory into pressure on Netanyahu to return to peace talks with the Palestinians. Others wearily said that the newly re-crowned Obama can't be bothered.
"I think the White House has realized that the Israeli-Palestinian issue costs a lot of political capital, but brings very little results," wrote Noam Sheizaf, of the webzine www.972mag.com.
Attacks on Netanyahu came briskly, from the left and from the right.
On the left, columnist Larry Derfner wrote that Netanyahu's Romney wager could lead to the resurgence of an Israeli peace camp now that "no one is fooled by his denials that he backed Romney and opposed Obama as demonstratively as he possibly could."
On the right, former ambassador to the United States Sallai Meridor, a member of Netanyahu's party, estimated that the "very strategic, very disciplined" Obama is unlikely to quickly forget that Netanyahu betted on Romney.
At a panel discussion in Tel Aviv, Meridor said, "I don't think we can just assume that what happened between them over past four years will have just evaporated. When people fight for their political life and feel that their partner is trying to undermine their chances — it's not going to disappear."
The prime minister faced the assault with a double-pronged defense. On the one hand, he summoned US Ambassador Daniel Shapiro to Jerusalem to receive his well-wishes, in which (as was noted on every evening news program) he was ample in his praise for the United States, but kept his reflections on its re-elected president to a minimum.
“I think the United States of America again demonstrated why it’s the greatest democracy on earth. The security relationship between the United States and Israel is rock solid,” he said.
Secondly, he admonished his ministers not to speak out of turn. According to the Israeli news site Ynet, after several ministers belonging to Netanyahu's party made negative comments about the electoral results, "the ministers' spokespersons and advisers received text messages from Netanyahu's office, asking them not to comment about Obama's re-election. The Likud spokespersons were requested to stick with the statements issued by Netanyahu's office."
As in all stressful family situations, there were those who fanned the flames and those who played peacemaker.
Some political analysts reported on Nov. 7, which announced not only news of Obama's victory but also that of a political opponent of Netanyahu who now leads a religious party challenging him, as something of a personal Waterloo. Other Israel observers issued calming predictions that Obama, being Obama, will not seek revenge upon the Israeli prime minister.
"Israelis may be surprised that while Israel may have been front and center on the campaign, it will not be front and center in Obama's policy,” Martin Indyk, a Clinton-era ambassador to Israel, told Israel Radio. “He had his fingers burned in dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and unless he sees from both the Palestinian leadership and the Israelis a real willingness to engage to resolve the issue, I don't think he's going to make it a priority. I think he is going to be focused on other parts of the world where he can achieve more."





http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/sites/default/files/images/Pro-IsraelAd_0.jpg

U.S. rabbi faces dissent for slamming Obama Following a blog post insulting the U.S. president and his supporters, members of Rabbi Steven Pruzansky's large Orthodox congregation in New Jersey circulated a petition taking him to task.

Zionist Lobby in US Takes a Hit in Latest National Election

Obama victory spells trouble for Israel’s Netanyahu
 
Obama’s Victory Shocks Israel

Poll: Israeli Jews favor Romney by wide margin

Kabbalists pray for ‘Moses’ Romney’s victory Quorum of ultra-religious men stage secret prayer meant to topple incumbent President Obama

'Warm' Netanyahu-Bennett Talk Heralds Anti-Obama Pact?


United States stock markets plunge after Obama's reelection

Jewish journal reveals Zionist Israel-firsters dominate GOP foreign policy







Major Shake-Up in Congress
AMERICAN FREE PRESS 
• 2012 election sees major changes coming in House and Senate for 2013

Congress will see a steep drop in Jewish members after the November election.

The United States Congress reached several milestones in the latest presidential election on Nov. 6. In this “Spotlight on Congress,” AFP takes a look at the changes that will occur in the next Congress, when a new round of legislators take their seats following the lame-duck session.
In the Senate, there were 10 incumbents who retired (six Democrats and four Republicans from Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin). One incumbent, Richard Lugar of Indiana, lost in the primary, and there was one special election due to the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) for the remainder of his term. Out of those 12 seats up for grabs, the Democrats gained three seats (Connecticut, Indiana and Massachusetts, the last won by Wall Street critic Elizabeth Warren who will be the first female senator from that state). The Republicans gained one seat (Nebraska) and an Independent gained another—Maine, which was won by Angus Stanley King Jr., former governor of that state from 1995 to 2003.
Overall in the Senate, the Democrats and Independents picked up one seat each, and the Republicans lost two, so that makes the count Democrats 53, Republicans 45 and independents 2.
Of special note is that, barring any unforeseen occurrences, there will be 20 female senators in the upper house, up from 17, the most ever in U.S. history.
And a big sigh of relief for freedom-loving Americans, their longtime nemesis Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), a champion of the police state, a neutered Internet and perhaps his true allegiance, Israel, is one of those retiring. AFP wishes Lieberman mazel tov!
The House of Representatives elections were held for all 435 seats and also for the delegates from the District of Columbia and five major U.S. territories.
In the House there were 40 incumbents who retired—21 Democrats and 19 Republicans, from districts in the 23 states of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin.
Unlike in the Senate, candidates in the House are impacted by their state’s population in the form of redistricting, and this is the first congressional election using apportioned districts based upon the 2010 Census.
A side effect of redistricting is that many incumbents vie against each other in the same district, which results in a higher than usual number of incumbents being defeated in the primaries.
Each state has its own redistricting standards, which is the process of drawing electoral district boundaries. And with redistricting comes gerrymandering, which is “the deliberatemanipulation of political boundaries for electoral advantage, usually of incumbents or a specific political party.”
According to the U.S. non-profit FairVote, which provides public information about “the impact of voting systems on political representation and voter turnout, issues reports on legislative redistricting and competition in U.S. congressional elections,” “the redrawn districts possibly represented the ‘worst congressional map ever,’ with most districts badly gerrymandered and uncompetitive.”
In the primary elections, 13 representatives lost renomination. Eight lost in redistricting battles pitting incumbents against each other, five incumbents lost nomination to non-incumbent challengers, and one failed to make the ballot for renomination. Seven of those losers were Democrats, five of which were due to redistricting and two due to a non-incumbent challenger, and six were Republicans; three in redistricting and three to a non-incumbent challenger, from the six states of Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas.
Also of note, according to USA Today, “the Senate will have six fewer veterans and the House may see little or no change in veterans’ representation as a result of Tuesday’s election, a disappointing result for those hoping to seemore vets in Congress.”
“The Senate currently has 26 veterans, but that number will fall to 20,” said the article, “and this is important because we have been losing about 10 veterans in each election over the last few cycles.”
Additionally, according to the Jewish weekly Forward, “Congress will see a steep drop in Jewish members after the November election,” which was correct.
Forward projected “that 31 members of the House and Senate will be Jewish in 2013. The last Congress with so few Jews entered service in 1979, according to data presented by the Pew Forum.”
On a final note, the House lost two great legislators, who championed peace and honest government.
Longtime peace advocate Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) was one of the congressmen who lost in a heated primary due to redistricting.
And Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) announced during his presidential election that he would be retiring and would not run again for his seat.


Romney,Wall Street Lose Big
On Nov. 7, following the presidential election, stocks and commodities took a hefty tumble in trading throughout the day, reports The New York Times. What was the reason? “Wall Street went long on Mitt Romney, doling out millions of dollars of donations in the hope of beating back financial regulation,” noted the Times. When Romney and Wall Street lost, conceded the Times, the top financial firms sent a message of their own by engaging in a hard sell-off.



Another Loser
Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire casino tycoon who spent $100 million on GOP political campaigns, couldn’t hide his disappointment with the 2012 election.
Israel Haymon, Adelson’s daily newspaper published in Israel, ran a headline on the day after the election which read “America Chose Socialism.”
Israel Hayom fervently supports Netanyahu, a close friend of Romney and the leading voice pushing for a war with Iran. Obama’s victory was a big upset to the warhawks who thought they had their Iran war in the bag.


America Can — and Will — Survive Obama
by Michael Collins Piper
You may recall that many patriots were sure Bill Clinton would usher America into a communist police state and the end of the United States as we knew it. But that didn’t happen. However—after Clinton—when conservative Republican George W. Bush came into office, the U.S. did get dragged into two needless foreign wars, in which we’re still embroiled, and—most notably—the GOP-controlled Congress enacted police-state measures, such as the infamous “Patriot” Act, precisely of the type we were warned would befall America under President Clinton.
And the truth is that, during the past four years, many Republican leaders—conservatives—told Americans that Clinton had really been a dandy president after all: He cut welfare, boosted the economy, brought jobs to U.S. workers, cracked down on crime—you name it.
Yet, during the eight-year misrule of Dubya Bush—though the GOP didn’t say this—those Clinton accomplishments fell by the wayside.
During the 2012 election, the GOP wanted voters to forget that, when he came to the presidency, Barack Obama inheritedmuch of the Bush-era economic disruption, resulting fromthose budget-busting foreign wars that spiraled our debt.
The point is this: Despite what you may think of Obama, he is just oneman and it’s highly unlikely—despite scare stories spread by fearmongers—that Obama will be able to “transform” America during the next four years into a “European-style socialist welfare state.” The Republicans still control the House of Representatives—and thus the national purse-strings—and they can and will curtail any wild spending Obama might propose.
But don’t cheer too much for the GOP. As Ron Paul repeatedly pointed out, the Republican leadership is unswervingly committed to rampant internationalism  eager to build up the “defense”
budget —really an “offense” budget—in order to enforce a global imperium that has nothing whatsoever to dowith traditional American nationalism.
Paul contends that we could cut the military budget as much as 50 percent and that the U.S. would still have the toughest military in the world, bar none. And Paul is no communist, nor is he anti-American.Wemust heed Paul’s warnings and combat efforts—largely from the GOP—to force America into another expensive and foolish foreign war, this time against Iran.
To his credit, Obama has thus far resisted pressure for war. Despite threats against him by supporters of Israel, Obama stood firm. And now that he no longer faces the pressure of seeking reelection, Obama has the opportunity to stand up to Israel once and for all. The New York Times is reporting widespread fear Obama will do just that.
During the past four years, a former Israeli, one Orly Taitz, was largely responsible for stirring controversy with claims Obama was born in Kenya. If true, Obama should have never been in the White House in the first place.
But the bottom line is that Obama remains president.
Forcing him from office would elevate Joe Biden to the presidency. A big-spending liberal and a shameless advocate for Israel, Biden would be no improvement.
The job of every real patriot is to stand behind Obama when he’s right, and to speak out when he’s wrong. But it would be a drasticmistake to get distracted with issues that are not going to be resolved and fail to focus on the big picture.
Right now we need to support Obama and the generals and admirals allied with him who are resisting pressure for war. Such a war would not be in America’s interests—and it could bring an end to America as we know it.





Mise à jour février 1013:



Netanyahu’s top security adviser: Settlements impede Western support of Israel

Netanyahu envoie paître Obama

Obama : "Netanyahou est un lâche l"!!

IRIB-Selon le quotidien israélien Haaretz, le président américain Barack Obama ...
....a déclaré lors des réunions à huis clos que « le Premier ministre Netanyahou est un lâche, il ne comprend pas les intérêts politiques d’Israël et les actions de son gouvernement mènera Israël à l'isolement international allant jusqu’à menacer son existence ».
Le correspondant des affaires politiques de Haaretz, Barak Ravid a obtenu cette information du  journaliste américain, Jeffrey Goldberg, qui a publié ces déclarations sur le site Internet Bloomberg View. Le journaliste américain connu pour être proche de la Maison Blanche a affirmé: « Le président américain est désormais indifférent à l’égard de la politique d’autodestruction du premier ministre israélien ».Et de souligner qu’ « Obama estime qu’à chaque annonce d’une nouvelle mesure de colonisation  dans les territoires palestiniens enfonce Israël plus dans  un isolement  international quasi-total ».
Haaretz rapporte des publications de Goldberg que  « le président américain pense que si Israël se trouve rejeté par la communauté internationale alors même les Etats-Unis s’éloigneront et Israël ne pourra pas survivre ».Pour ce qui est de l’Iran, Obama estime que « la République islamique d'Iran est une menace à court terme sur l'existence d’Israël. Toutefois, le comportement d’Israël est une menace existentielle pour lui-même à long terme ».Et malgré les craintes israéliennes envers  la nomination de John Kerry au poste de secrétaire d’Etat aux affaires étrangères en raison de son intention affiché de relancer les négociations,  le président Obama n’est pas enthousiaste pour leur relancement. Car, il estime que Netanyahou est prisonnier des  caprices du lobby israélien de colonisation qui ne s’intéresse guère à faire preuve de bonne volonté envers les Palestiniens ».« Pour Obama, un geste politique du Président des États-Unis d'Amérique à ce moment précis ne serait pas une chose sage ».
  
Réaction du Likoud: le président s'ingère dans les élections israéliennes
Des parlementaires israéliens ont accusé  Barack Obama de s'ingérer dans les élections israéliennes prévues le 22 janvier, après un éditorial affirmant que le président américain jugeait "contre-productives" les politiques du Premier ministre Benjamin Netanyahu."Ceci constitue une interférence grossière du président américain dans les élections israéliennes", ont souligné de hauts responsables du Likoud à Israel HaYom, un quotidien ouvertement pro-Netanyahu.
  
D'autres ont déclaré au Jerusalem Post que M. Obama était "en train de prendre sa revanche" sur M. Netanyahu, qui avait ouvertement apporté son soutien à son rival, le républicain Mitt Romney, lors de la campagne présidentielle américaine, l'automne dernier.Le bureau de M. Netanyahu s'est refusé à tout commentaire sur cet article.  
Mais Danny Danon, numéro 5 sur la liste du Likoud, a affirmé au quotidien Yediot Aharonot que tels commentaires auraient seulement pour conséquence d'"amener plus de sièges" à M. Netanyahu, qui fait déjà la course en tête.Dans son article, M. Goldberg écrit que "M. Obama n'a pas été surpris quand Israël a annoncé son projet de construire dans la zone E1, un secteur ultra-sensible de Cisjordanie situé près de Jérusalem, estimant qu'il s'inscrivait dans le cadre des politiques contre-productives de M. Netanyahu".  
Même si les Etats-Unis n'arrêteront pas leur aide à "Israël", l'etité sioniste pourrait néanmoins remarquer bientôt un "changement significatif" en "terme de protection diplomatique américaine (...) en particulier à l'ONU", écrit le chroniqueur, laissant entendre que les Etats-Unis pourraient ne pas faire de lobbying pour réunir des votes contre des résolutions perçues comme anti-israéliennes, et pourraient même s'abstenir.
Al Manar

‘Political coward’ Binyamin Netanyahu sees rift with Barack Obama widen

Israeli prime minister's aides accused American president of interfering in Israel's elections
in Jerusalem
The Observer,
Netanyahu pointing both fingers in front of microphone

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a campaign rally. Photograph: Amir Cohen/Reuters
Already fractious relations between Binyamin Netanyahu and Barack Obama have been further strained in the runup to the president's inauguration on Monday and the Israeli prime minister's anticipated victory in Tuesday's election.
Netanyahu aides accused Obama of interfering in the Israeli election following publication of an article by Jeffrey Goldberg, which quoted the president as saying: "Israel doesn't know what its own best interests are." Obama, wrote Goldberg, viewed Netanyahu as a "political coward".
The Israeli president, Shimon Peres, who has voiced alarm at the rupture between the two leaders, was due to meet a delegation of US senators, led by Republican John McCain, in Jerusalem on Saturday night to discuss strengthening strategic relations between the two allies.
"We must not lose the support of the United States. What gives Israel bargaining power in the international arena is the support of the United States... Without US support, it would be very difficult for us. We would be like a lone tree in the desert," he told the New York Times last week.
The Goldberg article, along with Obama's nomination of Chuck Hagel as defence secretary, has been interpreted in Israel as clear signs of the president's exasperation with Netanyahu and possible payback for the latter's support of Obama's rival, Mitt Romney, in the US election in November. Hagel is seen as "anti-Israel" because of his questioning of Israeli government policy and the pro-Israel lobby in the US.
Goldberg, who is known to be close to the president, wrote that Israel risked becoming "more of a pariah" and that Obama was reluctant to invest fresh effort in the Middle East peace process in the face of Netanyahu's continued settlement expansion.
"On matters related to the Palestinians, the president seems to view the prime minister as a political coward, an essentially unchallenged leader who nevertheless is unwilling to lead or spend political capital to advance the cause of compromise," Goldberg wrote.
"Obama... has been consistent in his analysis of Israel's underlying challenge: If it doesn't disentangle itself from the lives of West Bank Palestinians, the world will one day decide it is behaving as an apartheid state." The White House did not deny the words attributed to the president.
"Barack Obama said, simply and clearly, what he thinks about Israel's prime minister and where he is leading Israel," wrote former Israeli diplomat Alon Pinkas in Yedioth Ahronoth. "These are grave, alarming statements, which are without precedent."
Netanyahu is expected to continue as prime minister following Tuesday's election, which is likely to see a significant strengthening of the hardline pro-settler faction within the Israeli parliament. He is thought to be keen to include at least one centrist party in the next coalition government, in part to appease the US administration.
The Israeli prime minister is expected to visit Washington in March for the annual meeting of the pro-Israel lobby group Aipac. Obama and Netanyahu did not meet during the latter's last visit to the US in September in what was seen as a White House snub. Obama has not visited Israel since taking office four years ago, although there has been speculation about a possible trip in the summer.


Pro-Israel or Pro-Obama?
September 11, 2011 By


Republican Bob Turner, Democrat David Weprin, Senator Joe Lieberman and Mayor Ed Koch all agree, President Obama is not pro Israel.



VIDEO - ECI - THE UNITER



VIDEO - ECI - Daylight: The Story of Obama and Israel



VIDEO - ECI - TIME TO ACT. Is President Obama serious about stopping Iran?