|
By Ira Sharkansky
 JERUSALEM—A recent op-ed piece in the New York Times argues against any concessions by Arab governments to Israel in exchange for an Israeli gesture on settlements. The author, a member of the Saudi elite, demands more than a settlement freeze. He wants a complete withdrawal of settlements from what he calls the West Bank. (By some interpretations, that geographical label means all of Israel.) He bases his argument on the notion of Arab land. It was ours. Israel took it. Israel must give it back before Arabs make any concessions to Israel.
The argument may resonate with the European and North American left, and perhaps even in the Obama White House. The weight of the argument is political (there are more Arabs than Jews, and the Arabs have all that oil and gas), dressed up in legal and historical language. It is no more convincing than the screams of religious settlers: God gave it to us.
The factual record is inconclusive.
Maybe God did give it to Jews. However, He defined the land poorly, with at least three different descriptions in His Torah. He said something about sharing it with others, and being strangers in another land.
The Arab argument is not much better. There never was a Palestine to serve as the basis of a claim. The Ottoman Empire lost control in World War I. Jordan took possession in 1948, but its claim was shaky at best. Israel took possession in 1967 pretty much the way the Jordanians did 19 years earlier. It conceded part of it to the Palestine National Authority in 1993, but has entered and left as security demanded.
There remain Jewish settlements sprinkled throughout the West Bank. Some are on land privately owned by individual Palestinians, and they represent a problem for Israel. Others may sit on land that Palestinians say is their own, but with nothing more than "Grandpa told me it was his."
It is more accurate to describe the area as "disputed" rather than "occupied."
No doubt the International Court of Justice and the United Nations General Assembly would decide that it belongs to
Go to the top of next column
|
|
Palestine. No sane Israeli would turn to those bodies for a decision, given their well documented bias against Israel.
So at least for the time being, we are left with possession being nine-tenths of the law. There are efforts from the highest places to persuade concessions out of Israel, but they will have to make more sense than the op-ed piece by the Saudi prince.
Involved in Israelis' calculations are the responses of Lebanese and Palestinians to earlier withdrawals from Southern Lebanon and Gaza. Justice is a murky and mostly irrelevant element in politics. How the Arabs responded to those actions influence Israeli willingness to be forthcoming without a substantial quid pro quo. Adding to this are Arafat's rejection of the Barack-Clinton deal in 2000, and Abbas' rejection of Olmert's proposal in 2008.
Against these experiences, why should Israel bother? Peace would be ideal, but first steps have produced rejection, rockets, and suicide bombings.
Americans and Europeans do not like Israeli stubbornness, but their rhetoric is not sufficient inducement.
With no serious talk of sanctions, much less troop movements against Israel, it appears that policymakers in Europe and North America accept at least part of the Israeli narrative.
On the other side of the country is an emerging problem that may bubble up to something substantial. In the misery that is Gaza there is no capacity or incentive to process the sewage. So it lies in pools on land or flows to the sea. The pools have broken, adding to the discomfort of near neighbors. Israel is worried that sea borne sewage will drift north to foul the desalinization plant at Ashkelon. The brown stain may also bother Egyptians and other decent people who worry about pollution wherever it occurs.
Will the sewage serve as a Palestinian weapon to extract concessions from Israel? Are there international bodies willing to help the Gazans with its treatment, if only the Israelis will let in the construction supplies?
Some might be tempted to ponder Jonathan Swift's tongue in cheek Modest Proposal for dealing with the Irish problem. Could Israel stop the flow of Gaza's sewage by closing off the supply of food?
It is time to wish you all the appropriate blessings for the New Year. In God's language, שנה טובה .
|
|
