November 3, 2015

There are three ways the Obama-Netanyahu meeting at the White House on Nov. 9 — the two leaders’ first meeting after more than a year of talking mostly past each other — can go wrong.

1. If President Barack Obama decides to surprise the prime minister and ruin the meeting.

2. If Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decides to surprise the president and ruin it.

3. If a misunderstanding, or miscalculation, ruins it.

Other than that, as most analysts agree, the two men are more likely than not to “put on a professional, perhaps even a friendly show,” as David Horovitz wrote in Times of Israel.

From what I understand, both sides are preparing for the meeting with attention and care. The fact that the personal relationship between the two leaders is not very good; the fact that they’ve fought time and again in the last year; the fact that everyone knows they fundamentally disagree on many issues; the way Obama thinks Netanyahu is a leader with no vision and no courage; the way Netanyahu thinks Obama is a leader with no real grasp of the issues and dangerous ideological tendencies — all this makes it easier to avoid misunderstandings. This is not a meeting that anyone takes lightly by assuming that things can take care of themselves.

So let’s rule out misunderstandings.

Also, from what I understand, the prime minister does not want to put on yet another show of belligerence in Washington. The agreement with Iran is a done deal, and Netanyahu needs to move on, hoping for a better president in 2017, hoping for something down the road to be a game changer in the Middle East, possibly planning for something down the road through which Israel can change the game.

In fact, in their past meetings, Netanyahu never initiated confrontation. He did, of course, initiate confrontation over Iran in his decision to speak to Congress. But when he was invited to the White House, the plan was always for him to be on his best behavior, and when that did not happen — for example, when he lectured Obama back in 2011 — it was in response to a surprise move by Obama: The president decided to include an allusion to the 1967 line in his remarks. Netanyahu — offended and shocked — decided that this was not the time for silence.

So let’s rule out a decision by Netanyahu to surprise the president and ruin it.

This leaves us with the president. He has surprised Netanyahu in the past, and he has, time and again, made their White House encounters uncomfortable. Does he want to make it uneasy yet again?

Why would he want such a thing? Obama won the battle over Iran; he understands that a real achievement on the Israeli-Palestinian track is unlikely to materialize before the end of his term; he is busy with Syria, ISIS, Iraq, Afghanistan and other foreign-affairs issues more pressing than anything in which Israel plays a major role. He has no reason to ruin the meeting — except that Obama’s logic tends to be somewhat different from what Jerusalem calls logic. And, of course, there is this tiny thing called ego. Obama might decide that there is a score to be settled.

Everybody’s tired

There is no great enthusiasm in Washington or Jerusalem in preparation for this meeting. No great hope for reconciliation. If, in past meetings, there was always a shred of hope that maybe this time the two leaders would finally begin a more cordial period in their relations; if, in past meetings, there were people who still said that it doesn’t have to be this way — this time, everybody is realistic. There is a need for a meeting, possibly the last meeting before Obama’s departure. But there will be no clean slate, no new page, no “Let’s try again.”

Obama is tired of Netanyahu; Netanyahu is tired of Obama; observers are tired of the Obama-Netanyahu relations; Congress is tired of having to deal with Iran; AIPAC is tired of having to clean up the mess; Hillary Clinton is tired of having to explain that she will not be another Obama when it comes to Israel; Republican candidates are tired of trying to outdo each other in statements of support for Israel; Israelis are tired of an American that seems lost in this region; and American Jews are tired of feeling trapped between a rock and a hard place.

Truthfully, all these players and observers are just killing time before the next games — be it the American election or another Middle East eruption — begin.

The agenda

Here is what Netanyahu wants from this meeting:

1. Weaponry that could one day be useful in battling Iran, if and when the need arises.

2. Some measure of understanding regarding possible Iranian “breaches” of the agreement.

3. An understanding that what the Palestinian front currently needs is quieting down — not grand initiatives.

Here is what Obama wants from this meeting:

A. To make sure that Israel lets the Iran agreement run its course without interruption.

B. To satisfy Israel and its supporters (in Congress and elsewhere) enough for them not to harass him with more demands.

C. For Israel to avoid any moves in the West Bank that will further complicate the prospect for a future two-state solution.

Points 1 and 2 are somewhat problematic: The more weaponry Israel gets, the more it might be tempted to use it against Iran and disrupt the agreement from running its course.

Point A is very problematic: Obama is not going to tell Netanyahu what Iran needs to do in order for it to be considered a breach worthy of retribution. Netanyahu is going to suspect — for good reason — that, for Obama, no breach will be worthy of retribution.

Point 3 is the easy one — that is, unless the president decides to ruin the meeting by deciding to revisit his initiatives for the Palestinian front (or by surrendering to such a demand from his tireless secretary of state).

Point B is manageable: Israel will get enough to discourage it from complaining, but not enough for it to be fully satisfied.