![]() ![]() So in risking a rupture with the White House, Netanyahu is also risking a break with Israeli voters. The state of the “special relationship” with the United States is of crucial importance to Israeli voters, who see America as their closest and most important ally. READ: Obama and Netanyahu: A clash of world views, not just personalities In 1999, Clinton similarly pursued what some call “snub diplomacy” when his administration denied Netanyahu meetings amidst a tight race with Labor’s Ehud Barak, to whom Netanyahu ultimately lost. Less than a month before the 1996 Israeli elections, President Bill Clinton organized the signing of an anti-terror pact before the cameras with Shimon Peres, the Labor Party prime minister whom Netanyahu ended up defeating for his first term in office. administrations have deployed to sway the Israeli public. ![]() The White House denied it was attempting to influence the Israeli elections by rebuffing Netanyahu and pointed to the well-circulated statement on why the prime minister wasn’t offered a meeting: “As a matter of long-standing practice and principle, we do not see heads of state or candidates in close proximity to their elections.”īut such visits – or the lack thereof – have historically been one of the diplomatic weapons U.S. “This election cycle in Israel fits the hallmark of an American administration that seeks to influence the outcome,” said David Weinberg, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies who has studied American influence in Israeli elections. Election momentum shifts away from Netanyahu ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |