A New Path for NATO and Israel
Both alliances need reform to undo the damage Trump has done and prepare to face coming challenges.
By Rahm Emanuel
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte visits the White House in Washington, June 24. Jacquelyn Martin/Associated PressPresident Trump has eroded America’s global standing.
He has alienated allies while undermining our own economy by sowing chaos and driving up prices through tariffs.
Nevertheless, as I prepare to address audiences in Berlin and Tel Aviv this week, I’ve taken a view very different from many of my Democratic peers.
The next administration shouldn’t seek a mere reset to some traditional norm—that underappreciates the damage Mr. Trump has done to U.S. credibility.
We need to reform our alliances fundamentally, especially with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Israel, to meet the challenges ahead.
In 2019, French President Emmanuel Macron called NATO “brain-dead.”
With Russia reeling, America’s foremost alliance must pivot from guaranteeing the free world’s common defense to coordinating its collective deterrence.
Vladimir Putin is on his heels in Ukraine, and the Kremlin is losing sway over its “near abroad,” the former Soviet states Russia considers its property.
The Russian economy is faltering.
These setbacks will likely prompt Mr. Putin to lash out.
To pre-empt his mischief, NATO needs to take four steps.
First, move any mobile assets in Western Europe east of the Rhine River, including many now stationed near its headquarters in Brussels.
Forward presence is key to deterrence, and the former Warsaw Pact states and the Baltic nations are the new front line.
Second, establish a new protocol for gray-zone strikes.
For too long, Moscow has allegedly directed cyberattacks, border provocations, “stray” drones and underwater cable cuts with impunity.
(Russia usually denies Western governments’ and analysts’ accusations of such clandestine aggression.)
Until Moscow understands the consequences, it will continue to push the envelope.
NATO needs to articulate how Russia will pay the price for cloaked wrongdoing.
Third, reform and clarify the alliance’s division of labor.
No longer should our allies presume America’s military alone will deter Russia.
Our European allies need to dedicate resources to their common security.
Washington’s resources should act as a tripwire and strategic enabler to Europe’s defensive posture, deploying military capacities that we alone possess, such as our cyber prowess.
This will ensure the alliance’s security in the event of a frontal Russian attack.
Finally, Europe needs to be more economically strategic.
With China’s grip on critical minerals and Iran’s ability to sequester oil, NATO’s economies remain much too entwined with critical supply chains that our adversaries control.
We need to develop a zone of cooperation, investing resources such that we are no longer dependent on our adversaries and to ensure that we are ahead of the competition in such strategically vital fields as robotics, quantum computing, artificial intelligence, fusion, life sciences, and geothermal and modular nuclear energy.
Which brings us to the Middle East.
Our alliance with Israel is at a crossroads and must be set on a new path, lest the relationship split entirely.
Yitzhak Rabin admonished his country to “fight terrorism as if there’s no peace process, and work to achieve peace as if there’s no terror.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has the former imperative to the exclusion of the latter, leaving Israel strategically vulnerable and diplomatically isolated.
He has turned the “startup nation” into a modern Sparta, by Mr. Netanyahu’s own description, and an international pariah.
The U.S. may want never to abandon Israel, but the current government has led the Jewish state into a dead end.
Whatever anyone believes about Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir’s dream of a “Greater Israel”—in my view, their crusade is the mirror image of the despicable chant “from the river to the sea,” both fantasies of fanatics—it isn’t in the U.S. interest to align itself with a government that has given in to the worst of its domestic voices by pursuing permanent control of the West Bank and Gaza.
In that spirit, it is high time for America to replace its quest for a “two-state solution” with something new—a 23-state alternative.
Something profound has changed in the region of late: Unlike during the Oslo process, the wider Arab world has become increasingly eager to make peace with Israel.
That shift opens new possibilities—opportunities for Washington to align the Arab League’s desire for stability with both the Palestinians’ desire for sovereignty and Israel’s need for security.
Jerusalem’s complaint has long been that it doesn’t have a partner for peace—Israeli prime ministers who have extended an olive branch have been met with unrelenting terrorism from their Palestinian partners.
Having advised both Presidents Clinton and Obama, I can say without doubt that the complaint that has soured so many Israelis on the prospect of negotiations has merit. But Israelis’ future can’t be held hostage to past recriminations.
That said, it can’t be Israel’s burden to divine a true partner.
The Arab world needs to step into that role at long last, nurturing a partner for peace.
That’s where Saudi Arabia’s interest in détente with Israel comes in, as just one example.
In a 23-state solution, Israel’s regional neighbors would help establish the competent, legitimate government that any would-be Palestinian nation would demand, thereby opening the door to lasting Israeli security.
In exchange, all 21 Arab nations, plus a new Palestinian state, would establish full diplomatic relations with Jerusalem.
Additionally, to fortify our own economic security, the U.S. should ensure that the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor raised in a 2023 memorandum of understanding emerges as a bypass to the commercial choke points controlled by Russia, China and Iran.
The IMEC would reduce Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz and slash logistical costs by up to 30%, according to India’s commerce minister.
Finally, we should end the American taxpayer’s subsidy of Israel’s defense.
While we should want the country to maintain its strategic advantages, Israel can buy our arms under the same terms and restrictions that apply to every other trusted American ally.
After the security backsliding of the Trump years, Washington needs to establish new strategic foundations to preserve broader U.S. interests and reboot American credibility.
We need a foreign-policy approach that rejuvenates our alliances and creates enduring and mutually beneficial ties around the world.
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario