Yediot Aharonot believes that "The US did not cast its veto because it supports the Israeli policy," and adds that "The [Republican-controlled] House of Representatives wanted to prevent the condemnation and Obama sought to placate the House of Representatives." The author asserts that "The American veto in the UN Security Council over the weekend is sealing off the Israeli leadership’s ears and brain. They insist on not understanding the message arriving from Washington: The Middle East can go to hell; the only thing that matters is the presidential election [next year]. The American veto was designed to meet President Obama’s domestic needs. It brings with it no good news. On the contrary, the devotees of the status-quo in Israel and the opponents of the diplomatic process in the Arab world can rub their hands. They won. The stalemate will continue. The Americans have given up on us. If the diplomatic process resumes, it will occur only after the next presidential election, or after another wave of bloodletting in the region, whichever comes first."
Ma’ariv suggests that US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice’s language in explaining the veto was such that "Israel would do well to assume that a veto on this issue will not be imposed again – with all that this implies," and cautions that the fact that the US was the lone UN Security Council member to oppose the draft resolution, was "a reminder of Israel’s international isolation and fragile diplomatic dependence, on such issues, on the US."
Yisrael Hayom commends the veto "as an achievement for Israeli policy," but cautions that "There is no certainty how often the US will see fit to cast its veto in the future and there is certainty that it will exact a high price from Israel for its willingness to be caught in an inglorious diplomatic isolation." The author contends that the fact that Abu Mazen decided to press ahead with the draft resolution despite US entreaties to the contrary, means that "the status of the US is in retreat." The paper avers that "The alarming weakness of the US is only part of the problem," and adds that "The Palestinians have, in effect, decided to quit the negotiations with Israel," and wait for the international community to give them what they want by fiat instead of negotiating with Israel. The author urges the seven-member ministerial forum to meet and decide what price Israel can pay for the veto and warns that "The vote was good for Israel, but a diplomatic tsunami looms on the horizon."
===========================
The Jerusalem Post discusses the impressive fourth-quarter growth figures released recently. Focusing on several problematical aspects of the Israeli economy, the editor cautions: “This is no time for reckless self-satisfaction of the sort that would tempt us to throw caution to the wind and disregard common-sense budgetary restrictions.”
Haaretz comments on recommendations by the Israel Police to press corruption charges against two senior Bank Hapoalim executives, and states: “When cracks appear in a bank’s image, the result can be disastrous not only to those with accounts at the bank in question, but also, due to chain reactions, to the entire economy.”
432