By Jeffrey Goldberg
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visits the White House tomorrow, President Barack Obama will tell him that his country could face a bleak future — one of international isolation and demographic disaster — if he refuses to endorse a U.S.-drafted framework agreement for peace with the Palestinians. Obama will warn Netanyahu that time is running out for Israel as a Jewish-majority democracy. And the president will make the case that Netanyahu, alone among Israelis, has the strength and political credibility to lead his people away from the precipice.
In an hour-long interview Thursday in the Oval Office, Obama, borrowing from the Jewish sage Rabbi Hillel, told me that his message to Netanyahu will be this: â€œIf not now, when? And if not you, Mr. Prime Minister, then who?â€ He then took a sharper tone, saying that if Netanyahu â€œdoes not believe that a peace deal with the Palestinians is the right thing to do for Israel, then he needs to articulate an alternative approach.” He added, “Itâ€™s hard to come up with one thatâ€™s plausible.â€
Unlike Netanyahu, Obama will not address the annual convention of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobbying group, this week — the administration is upset with Aipac for, in its view, trying to subvert American-led nuclear negotiations with Iran. In our interview, the president, while broadly supportive of Israel and a close U.S.-Israel relationship, made statements that would be met at an Aipac convention with cold silence.
Obama was blunter about Israelâ€™s future than I’ve ever heard him. His language was striking, but of a piece with observations made in recent months by his secretary of state, John Kerry, who until this interview, had taken the lead in pressuring both Netanyahu and the Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, to agree to a framework deal. Obama made it clear that he views Abbas as the most politically moderate leader the Palestinians may ever have. It seemed obvious to me that the president believes that the next move is Netanyahuâ€™s.
â€œThere comes a point where you canâ€™t manage this anymore, and then you start having to make very difficult choices,â€ Obama said. â€œDo you resign yourself to what amounts to a permanent occupation of the West Bank? Is that the character of Israel as a state for a long period of time? Do you perpetuate, over the course of a decade or two decades, more and more restrictive policies in terms of Palestinian movement? Do you place restrictions on Arab-Israelis in ways that run counter to Israelâ€™s traditions?â€
During the interview, which took place a day before the Russian military incursion into Ukraine, Obama argued that American adversaries, such as Iran, Syria and Russia itself, still believe that he is capable of using force to advance American interests, despite his reluctance to strike Syria last year after President Bashar al-Assad crossed Obama’s chemical-weapons red line.
â€œWeâ€™ve now seen 15 to 20 percent of those chemical weapons on their way out of Syria with a very concrete schedule to get rid of the rest,â€ Obama told me. â€œThat would not have happened had the Iranians said, â€˜Obamaâ€™s bluffing, heâ€™s not actually really willing to take a strike.â€™ If the Russians had said, â€˜Ehh, donâ€™t worry about it, all those submarines that are floating around your coastline, thatâ€™s all just for show.â€™ Of course they took it seriously! Thatâ€™s why they engaged in the policy they did.â€
I returned to this particularly sensitive subject. â€œJust to be clear,â€ I asked, â€œYou donâ€™t believe the Iranian leadership now thinks that your â€˜all options are on the tableâ€™ threat as it relates to their nuclear program — you donâ€™t think that they have stopped taking that seriously?â€
Obama answered: â€œI know they take it seriously.â€
How do you know? I asked. â€œWe have a high degree of confidence that when they look at 35,000 U.S. military personnel in the region that are engaged in constant training exercises under the direction of a president who already has shown himself willing to take military action in the past, that they should take my statements seriously,â€ he replied. â€œAnd the American people should as well, and the Israelis should as well, and the Saudis should as well.â€
I asked the president if, in retrospect, he should have provided more help to Syriaâ€™s rebels earlier in their struggle. â€œI think those who believe that two years ago, or three years ago, there was some swift resolution to this thing had we acted more forcefully, fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the conflict in Syria and the conditions on the ground there,â€ Obama said. â€œWhen you have a professional army that is well-armed and sponsored by two large states who have huge stakes in this, and they are fighting against a farmer, a carpenter, an engineer who started out as protesters and suddenly now see themselves in the midst of a civil conflict — the notion that we could have, in a clean way that didnâ€™t commit U.S. military forces, changed the equation on the ground there was never true.â€
He portrayed his reluctance to involve the U.S. in the Syrian civil war as a direct consequence of what he sees as Americaâ€™s overly militarized engagement in the Muslim world: â€œThere was the possibility that we would have made the situation worse rather than better on the ground, precisely because of U.S. involvement, which would have meant that we would have had the third, or, if you count Libya, the fourth war in a Muslim country in the span of a decade.â€
Obama was adamant that he was correct to fight a congressional effort to impose more time-delayed sanctions on Iran just as nuclear negotiations were commencing: â€œThereâ€™s never been a negotiation in which at some point there isnâ€™t some pause, some mechanism to indicate possible good faith,â€ he said. â€œEven in the old Westerns or gangster movies, right, everyone puts their gun down just for a second. You sit down, you have a conversation; if the conversation doesnâ€™t go well, you leave the room and everybody knows whatâ€™s going to happen and everybody gets ready. But you donâ€™t start shooting in the middle of the room during the course of negotiations.â€ He said he remains committed to keeping Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and seemed unworried by reports that Iran’s economy is improving.