ed note–In the midst of the news this morning that former president George H.W. Bush has died, it needs to be both recollected and reconsidered the heavy political price he paid as a result of putting the squeeze on Judea, Inc vis forcing a peace deal to which the Jooish state is/has been/always will be 666% opposed, and to compare/contrast this to all the similar noise being generated against the person and presidency of Donald J. Trump for the very same reasons.
Terry Atlas, Chicago Tribune President Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir are heading for a collision over the president`s efforts to force Israel to curtail construction of Jewish settlements in the occupied territories.
But for the moment, both leaders have political reasons to try to postpone the confrontation. The administration is offering Israel much less than the five-year, $10 billion loan guarantee package that it requested for resettling former Soviet Jews, and it is insisting on restrictions that Shamir adamantly opposes.
Picking up the issue after a four-month pause for the start of Arab-Israeli peace talks, Secretary of State James A. Baker III and Israeli Ambassador Zalman Shoval agreed after a lengthy meeting Friday to discuss their disagreements further early next month, effectively pushing the issue further down the road.
Baker did hint, however, that the U.S. might demand a halt to new settlement construction in exchange for approving at least some of the loan guarantees.
Bush is determined to use Washington`s economic leverage to impose limits on Israel`s settlement building in the occupied territories, which the president considers a major obstacle to an eventual Arab-Israeli peace.
But a nasty public fight with Israel now would divert attention from his effort to use Tuesday`s State of the Union address as a springboard to improve his standing with voters in coming weeks. Bush may well want to postpone the question until after the New Hampshire primary Feb. 18.
Republican challenger Patrick Buchanan has criticized the president for putting foreign affairs ahead of domestic concerns.
Shamir, facing the choice between the badly needed aid and continuing the extensive construction of Jewish housing in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, apparently would prefer to make no choice-at least until after Israeli elections, expected in the spring.
Shamir warned last week that ”no power on Earth” will prevent settlement construction, which played well with his conservative constituency but not necessarily with many Israeli voters concerned that Shamir is jeopardizing aid badly needed to boost Israel`s struggling economy.
”It would be better . . . for the Israeli government to table it-not to withdraw it, but to suspend action for a few months until after their elections and perhaps closer to ours,” said Samuel Lewis, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel.
The gap between the two leaders on the question of Israeli settlements is so wide that many analysts rate the chances for a face-saving compromise at no better than 50-50.
Shamir`s pro-settlement declarations, though intended for domestic political consumption, have ”added fuel to the fire” as the Bush administration drafts its terms for the loan guarantees, one American Jewish leader said.
The Israeli prime minister tried last fall to do an end-run around the White House by turning directly to Congress, where Israel`s supporters backed down only in the face of a threatened veto by Bush.
American Jewish groups this time are waiting for Shamir to come to some kind of arrangement with the White House, saying that all foreign aid is so unpopular politically now that Congress is unlikely to move on the loan guarantees unless Bush is out front lobbying for it.
”People aren`t interested in getting into another knock-down, drag-out fight that can`t be won,” acknowledged an official at one pro-Israel group.
American Jewish leaders have been warning Shamir for months-with little success-that his government`s settlement-building rush was jeopardizing Washington`s loan guarantees, which Israel is counting on to help it absorb as many as 1 million immigrants arriving from what was the Soviet Union.
The number of housing units under construction in the occupied territories reportedly more than quadrupled to 12,985 last year from 2,880 in 1990, a building boom that Palestinian negotiators have warned will kill the peace talks if the construction continues.
The administration has ruled out a five-year, $10 billion package for Israel as politically unrealistic, given the economic concerns of Americans. Instead, it wants the loan guarantees on a year-by-year basis.
Meanwhile, the U.S. is using satellite images to inventory current settlements in the occupied territories to provide a basis for holding Israel accountable to whatever deal it makes with Washington.
The Bush administration supports the concept of the loan guarantee, in which the U.S. effectively co-signs Israeli loans to provide funding for housing and other needs for the former Soviet Jews.
Although the money would not be used directly to build homes in the occupied territories, the administration wants to ensure that the financing doesn`t in effect free other Israeli funds to continue settlement activity.
The administration is looking at various arrangements that would reduce the value of the loan guarantees if Israel builds further settlements.
The loan guarantees, under which the U.S. would have to repay the loans if Israel failed to do so, are in addition to more than $3 billion a year in direct U.S. military and economic aid to the Jewish state.
