Bush's Legacy on Israel Debated on Eve of Visit

Appearing at an Israeli Embassy reception last Thursday to mark the 60th anniversary of the Jewish state, Vice President Cheney voiced a sentiment that is common among many American Jews, evangelicals and others. "Israel has never had a better friend in the White House than the 43rd president of the United States," he said.

Yet as President Bush prepares to return to Jerusalem this week to celebrate the milestone, that assessment is the subject of fierce debate both here and Israel. Few doubt the sincerity of Bush's passion, which has translated into unprecedented backing for Israeli self-defense and the most clearly stated presidential commitment to protect Israel if it is attacked.

But from left to right, Bush also faces criticism for pursuing Middle East policies that, many diplomats and analysts believe, have left Israel more threatened than when he assumed office in January 2001.

"The sum total is that if you measure Israeli security at the beginning of this administration and at the end of the administration, based on things the president either could have done, should have done or failed to do, the report card is pretty negative," said Daniel C. Kurtzer, who served as Bush's first-term ambassador to Israel.

Kurtzer, who now advises Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, cites, in part, what he sees as Bush's neglect of the peace process for most of his seven years in office. Despite the president's optimism that he can achieve a Palestinian-Israeli deal in his final year, Kurtzer and other analysts think Israel remains far from peace with its neighbors.

Meanwhile, the Israeli defense establishment is having second thoughts about Bush's decision to remove Saddam Hussein and the botched occupation of Iraq. Those policies, some argue, have helped fuel the rise of Israel's nemesis, Iran, whose president has spoken openly of trying to wipe Israel off the map. The war has also threatened to destabilize neighboring Jordan with a flood of refugees.

At first glance, the Iraq invasion "looked as if it would serve Israel's interest," said Shlomo Brom, a retired general and former director of strategic planning for the Israel Defense Forces. But "the way that it was implemented by this administration is eventually causing damage to Israel. It is strengthening the radical elements in the Middle East."

Brom concluded: "People are mistaken to think that the most friendly president is also the best president that Israel has ever had."

During a briefing for reporters last week, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley rejected such criticism. He said Hussein's ouster, the peace talks, Bush's support for Israel's self-defense and a greater Arab willingness to accept the Jewish state have been a boon for Israel.

"The violence, the intifada, is now dramatically down; violence against Israeli civilians [is] dramatically down," he said. "A major strategic threat to Israel has been removed, and there is a real opportunity, both with Palestinians and with Arab states more generally, for a peace."

Hadley added: "That's not a bad seven years' work."

Salai Meridor, Israel's ambassador to the United States, said it is unfair to blame Bush for not containing or bringing about a peace settlement. The latter, he said, has been undermined by the Palestinians' inability, until recently, to find leaders who are genuine partners with Israel.