ANALYSIS: Lieberman: Awkward choice to fix Israel's world standing

By Ofira Koopmans Mar 31, 2009, 16:37 GMT

Tel Aviv - Avigdor Lieberman looks set to be one of the most, if not the most, controversial foreign ministers Israel has ever had.

Coalition demands meant that Netanyahu, 59, finds himself in an uncomfortable position - without the narrow right-wing government he did not want, but with a foreign minister who may not be well received all over the world.

The appointment to the post of the 50-year-old leader of the Israel Beiteinu party, Netanyahu's largest coalition partner, could deepen Israel's isolation in the world, commentators have warned. It comes at a time Israel's image abroad is already at one of its all- time lows, in the aftermath of the Gaza war.

As a way round this, the Massachusetts Institute for Technology (MIT)-educated Netanyahu - who speaks fluent, American-accented English, was Israel's ambassador to the UN in his late 30s and is no stranger to the US ruling elite - is likely to personally maintain the relations with the new Administration of Barack Obama.

While Western European leaders may receive him with suspicion, Lieberman, who was born and raised in the former Soviet Union, could prove a suitable candidate to upgrade relations with Eastern Europe, where he could try to lobby for a blocking majority against any EU decisions deemed unfavourable to Israel, analysts say.

But most uneasy for the incoming Netanyahu government and its foreign minister will undoubtedly be the relations with the Arab world, which widely regards Lieberman as a racist and as anti-Arab. Foremost among these countries is Egypt.

Lieberman enraged Egyptian President Hosny Mubarak by telling a special Israeli parliament session in October that since Israel and Egypt had a peace treaty, Mubarak should either come to Israel, or 'go to hell.' He also said several years ago that should Arab countries launch an attack on Israel, it would be justified in bombing Egypt's Aswan Dam.

The main channel of communications between Egypt and Israel has usually gone through Egyptian Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman and a special envoy of the Israeli Prime Minister's Office. Netanyahu will likely use this same formula to overcome the awkward Lieberman-Egypt history - but awkward it will be.

So why is the Moldovan-born father of three, who emigrated to Israel at the age of 20 and lives in a settlement south-east of Jerusalem, so controversial?

Among other reasons, his election campaign focussed almost exclusively on what he regards as a radicalization amongst Israel's Arab citizens.

'No loyalty, no citizenship,' screamed his election slogan. Lieberman wants to pass a bill, under which supporting or sympathizing with the state's enemies, such as the radical Islamist Hamas in Gaza or Hezbollah in Lebanon, would become illegal.

Israelis who do so would be stripped of their citizenship - they would lose their right to vote and to receive social benefits.

Lieberman vehemently denies he is a racist, saying the law would apply to all Israelis.

He also wants to introduce social service as an alternative to those Israelis who do not serve in the military - ultra-Orthodox Jews and Muslim Arabs alike. But critics, not least among them Arab lawmakers in the Knesset, fume that the campaign singled out Arab Israelis in a way that reeked of racism.

His inhibition about calling a spade a spade has clearly appealed to especially young Israelis, many of whom are angry that citizens convicted of aiding militants continue to receive social security and other benefits.

Lieberman's ultra-nationalist party grew by more than a third in the February 10 elections to 15 mandates, becoming the third largest in the 120-seat Israeli parliament.

With a series of other contentious remarks to his name, his habit of not mincing his words, however, is not usually a sought-after trait in foreign ministers and diplomats.

Nonetheless, Lieberman is not a one-dimensional politician who can be tarred with the same brush as others in the far-right spectrum.

Despite his belligerent, extremist and what critics say are often populist statements, he clarified in an op-ed in New York's The Jewish Week in February that he supports the creation of a viable Palestinian state.

And in an interview with The Washington Post in early March, he stated that he would agree to vacate his settlement of Nokdim, near Bethlehem, 'if there really will be a two-state solution.'

He has even said in the past that he supports transferring Arab neighbourhoods of Jerusalem to Palestinian sovereignty as part of a peace deal, to the chagrin of the Israeli nationalist camp.

But he seems in no hurry to achieve that two-state solution, saying Israel and the Palestinians should first discuss security and the economy, and put off negotiations on Jerusalem or the evacuation of settlements.

His proposal that major Arab towns and villages in Israel should become part of the Palestinian state, under a territorial exchange that would see Israel keep its major settlement blocs in the West Bank, is also highly disputed.

Former Israeli premier Ariel Sharon, on his election in February 2001, likewise had started out with an extremely negative image, in Europe and much of the world, of a warmonger and hawk. That changed when he pushed through Israel's unilateral pullout from Gaza in 2005.

Egypt said it will judge the new government by its actions rather than by past statements. The rest of the world will likely do the same, watching closely.