Approaching Interstate Developments

The political “tsunami” allegedly threatening Israel, has two junctures: April 15, when the international quartet composed of the United States, the European Union, the U.N. and Russia was supposed to call for the establishment of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders with the capital at Jerusalem; and September, when the U.N. General Assembly will convene to decide on the recognition of the Palestinian state in the above parameters.

The first auguring date has so far passed — and lo and behold, the quartet, under U.S. pressure and contrary to the forecasts of pessimists in Israel, has not brought up such an initiative at all.

The quartet’s retreat, indeed, did not make headlines in the Israeli media which was preoccupied with Isaac Herzog and Amir Peretz — nonetheless, this has been a considerable success of Israeli diplomacy. And no less important — a possible hint of the Obama administration’s intentions. What’s clear for the moment is that the United States does not intend to be dragged along behind the European carriage. Both the chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee John Kerry, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, broke last week that the president will give a public speech where he will expand on his country’s policy in the Middle East, including the Israeli-Palestinian subject matter. However, they haven’t given any details.

According to reports from Washington, Obama has no intention to go the European way, but will rather suffice with more general ideas. They will certainly include support for the establishment of a Palestinian state — but won’t back the Palestinians’ one-sided move in the U.N. It’s not only that a step like this contradicts the basic American stance, according to which the solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be based on an agreement and negotiation between the parties; but not to assume that in the new political reality in the U.S., on the threshold of the presidential election campaign, Obama and his people will want to encourage international pressure on Israel, or to enter into unnecessary confrontations with it — which makes the success of the Palestinian move all the more limited, one way or another.

Even with a large majority (an automatic one) in the U.N. General Assembly won’t change the fact that a half of the Palestinians are ruled by Hamas in Gaza, the standing of the Palestinian authority in the West Bank is extremely circumscribed, and that East Jerusalem, supposed to be the capital of the new country, is located on Israel’s terrain.

As Aaron Miller recently commented, who along with Dennis Ross and others, dealt with the American side in the Middle East matters for decades, “… a paper resolution … won’t produce a state. In fact, a U.N. campaign for statehood will reflect Palestinian weakness, not resolve.” Should the Palestinians decide to put forward their proposal anyway, Israel won’t let it go. The projected Palestinian step is a flagrant violation of all the agreements and also U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. So it’s almost certain that this will bring about counter-measures, including unilateral actions of the other side from Israel.

Various factions of the left wing have recently launched a campaign of intimidation targeting the Israeli public with a political goal pushed for by vested interests: the overthrow of government and holding new elections. The new “peace initiative” freshly issued is part of this undertaking. “Economic sanctions on Israel would be imposed. 600,000 Israelis would turn into illegal residents in enemy country. The IDF would have to evacuate its bases in Judea and Samaria. Israel is going to be isolated.” And more cries of the kind of “Wolf! Wolf!”

Yet there is no room for complacency. The non-binding resolution of the U.N. General Assembly is also not a nice thing, and it will be exploited to the utmost degree to goad the state of Israel. Nevertheless, this murky wave, even if not a “tsunami,” cannot, in any case, be stopped. Even so, the sea around us is quite stormy — and indeed, wisdom and courage in statecraft will be required to clear a secure path for our ship.

Political “initiatives,” which are a cover for the abandonment of vital Israeli interests, are not on the agenda of this government. However, far-reaching practical steps in different areas are accounted for, even if only in order to coordinate positions with Washington. Whatever will be in these propositions will be motions to impede our ability to defend ourselves against threats to our security, whether from Iran and various Arab neighbors, or from the Palestinian terror.

*Translation of political cartoon – Abu Mazen: “I hope you don’t mind polygamy – on my way to wedding with you, I married him, too.”