T. Belman. While this may appear to be a setback, it isn’t. Since the settlements are not illegal, per se, and since Israel is fully in charge of Area C, there is absolutely no legal constraint to Israel building new settlements.
Furthermore, there is no need for Israel to annex the land because she is fully sovereign there. All she needs to do is apply Israel law. Then its a done deal.
Administration figures add the move also should not be seen as support for ‘unrestrained building’; US ambassador to Israel said behind shift in American approach
By TOI STAFF 20 November 2019,
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visits the prime minister’s Sukkah, during talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on October 18, 2019. At left is US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman (Amos Ben Gershom / GPO)
The new US policy to no longer considers settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem illegal “should not be seen as a green light for Israel to annex parts of the West Bank or start unrestrained building in settlements,” US officials told an Israeli news network Tuesday.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly promised to quickly apply Israeli sovereignty over the Jordan Valley if he is able to put together a new government amid ongoing political gridlock. He has indicated this would be acceptable to Washington, saying any such move would be made in “maximum coordination” with the United States.
Administration officials told Channel 13 news that the main motive for changing the policy, as announced by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday, was the Trump administration’s desire to reverse decisions and policy changes made by the Obama administration.
The officials also said US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman was the driving force behind Washington’s announcement.
Settler leaders attending an event to celebrate the announcement also told The Times of Israel Tuesday that Friedman personally initiated the shift in US policy.
Friedman, who is known for his close ties to the settlement movement, initiated the policy shift shortly after Donald Trump was elected president, but then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson opposed the move, according to Channel 13.
Friedman then reportedly raised the issue again when Pompeo replaced Tillerson in April 2018, this time getting a “green light” from the Trump administration to rewrite longstanding US policy on the issue of Israeli settlements.
The US officials said the White House gave Pompeo and his team a “free hand” to draft the new policy, and a special team of State Department lawyers was formed to examine the issue and hold consultations with the legal adviser of Israel’s foreign ministry.
Last month, the team presented Pompeo with the a 40-page legal position outlining the new US policy. Pompeo approved it, delaying a planned announcement last week due to a two-day flareup in violence in and around the Gaza Strip.
Earlier this week, US officials told Israel they were set to announce the new policy, but asked whether they should hold off on making the announcement out of fears it would further exacerbate tensions with Gaza. Officials in Jerusalem said there was no such concern, and encouraged Washington to make the announcement, the report said.
According to the TV report, the White House informed Blue and White chief Benny Gantz about the announcement ahead of time, to avoid any appearance of interfering in Israeli politics. Gantz is currently working to cobble together a government, but with less than 24 hours left to his deadline, seems increasingly unlikely to do so.
On Monday, Pompeo announced that after legal consultations, Washington concluded that the establishment of settlements in the West Bank was “not, per se, inconsistent with international law.”
In his announcement, Pompeo said the United States did not necessarily consider the settlements legal, but instead would defer to the judgement of Israeli courts.
The majority of settlers live in settlements that Israeli courts have judged legal.
While Palestinians and much of the international community condemned the change in policy, Netanyahu and other right-wing leaders welcomed Pompeo’s announcement, as did Gantz. Although it is largely symbolic, it fueled calls from settler supporters for increased construction or even the annexation of parts of the West Bank.
Netanyahu traveled to the West Bank on Tuesday to celebrate the US declaration, calling it a “huge achievement” that “fixed a historic wrong.”
“I think it is a great day for the State of Israel and an achievement that will remain for decades,” he said at a gathering of ecstatic supporters and settler leaders in Alon Shvut, a settlement outside of Jerusalem.
Settler leaders attending the event lauded the announcement.
“Settlement is not a crime and it is not an obstacle to peace. The actions of US ambassador Friedman reflect the reality on the ground and the legal status [of the settlements],” Efrat Regional Council chairman Oded Revivi told The Times of Israel.
The Efrat mayor told The Times of Israel that the US envoy was personally involved in initiating the policy change over the past few weeks and months.
Friedman is known for his close ties to the settlement movement and served as the chairman of the American Friends of Beit El organization before becoming ambassador.
@ roamnrab:I agree with you, I am for the application of Sovereignty ASAP in the Jordan Valley, Dead Sea Area, All Jewish Towns, all roads, nature parks and areas needed for security including the military bases in Judea/Samaria as a first step.
Bear Klein Said:
Let them ‘Eat It’!
Most people will not know the difference between annexation and applying Israeli Civil Law. So I believe the reaction of those opposed to annexation will be the same as the claim of sovereignty and with the application of civil law.
As Ted points out in his highlighted comments, there is no need to annex, as Israel is already the legal owner of the Land. I myself, whenever “annexation” was brought up by Israeli leaders-who certainly should have known better- have always rejected this “annexation” nonsense, because Israel was already Sovereign of the whole area from at least 1922, and never lost those rights, which are -I believe- inalienable.