PM says he is open to two state solution, but ‘Palestinians have emptied it of any relevance.’
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Wednesday that if he is reelected on March 17, he will not evacuate any settlements during his term.
“I don’t see such a move as being practical at this point. Since I’m in charge it won’t happen,” he said in an interview with Channel 2.
Insisting that he was open to Palestinian statehood, as he first claimed in his 2009 Bar-Ilan speech, Netanyahu said, “The Palestinians have emptied it of any relevance. Instead of negotiating they are going to the International [Criminal] Court in The Hague, charging IDF soldiers with war crimes.”
Meanwhile, the Central Election Committee is to hear a petition today by MK Stav Shaffir (Labor) to stop the transfer of 85 million shekels (about $21.8 million), to the settlements because the transfer was approved during the election campaign.
For similar reasons, attorney General Yehuda Weinstein last week stopped the transfer of $13 million for the construction of a visitors center at Barkan in the West Bank.
“Because this is an election period, greater weight should be given to the fact that this is a grant given at the discretion of the prime minister,” Shaffir said in her petition in calling for the transfer to be stopped.
In the interview, Netanyahu went on to deny that he had promised Habayit Hayehudi leader Naftali Bennett the defense portfolio in the next government. “I’m not going to rank the candidates. We now have an excellent defense minister,” he said, referring to Moshe Ya’alon. Netanyahu also denied that he and Bennett had agreed to refrain from attacking each other during the election campaign, despite Bennett’s public claim to the contrary.
The prime minister said he doesn’t rule out the possibility of inviting Yair Lapid’s Yesh Atid and Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni’s Zionist Camp into a coalition he heads, despite the troubled relationship he has with them. On the alliance between Livni and Herzog, he asked: “Is this a rotation or a mutation?” adding that he seeks a broad coalition, but not a rotation in the Prime Minister’s Office.
Netanyahu spent much of the interview defending his handling of the economy, placing the blame for the high cost of living, especially housing, on Finance Minister Yair Lapid and even former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, whose term ended six years ago.
“Olmert’s government made a scandalous decision in stopping any planning and construction in central Israel. Prices [of housing] soared in response. We started addressing this problem. However, two years ago the Likud ceased to be a large party. Why was that? Because we were joined by a party that was driven by the public mood,” he said in a reference to Yesh Atid. “Voters decided that. The ruling party lost control of housing policies.
Netanyahu said, “Of course we all have some responsibility for what happened. But my responsibility is that I couldn’t convince enough people to vote for us, so that we had to appoint someone unsuitable to manage housing.” Regarding his decision to put the inexperienced Lapid at the helm of the treasury, Netanyahu said, “I think it was imposed on me.”
Netanyahu rejected Lapid’s claims that he has ruined the relationship with the Obama administration. “The American public’s support of Israel is the broadest it’s ever been,” he said. “The Congress is solidly behind us. Relations with the administration on security and intelligence matters are strong and solid. That doesn’t mean we don’t have disagreements.”
In other political news, MK David Rotem of Yisrael Beiteinu has announced he is leaving politics and will not contend in the upcoming election. Rotem, an MK since January 2007, headed the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee for the past six years and had served on the Judicial Appointments Committee.
Moshe Kahlon continues to unveil his Kulanu party’s list of candidates. In the next few days he is expected to present his “military” candidate, Maj. Gen. (res.) Yoav Galant, who will feature high on the list. Ahead of joining Kulanu, Galant opened his own Facebook page. On Monday he posted a photo of himself at sea, with the caption: “It’s time to lift our heads above the water.”
On Monday Kahlon announced the addition of Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Rachel Azaria to his party. “We need people like Rachel with their sense of mission,” he said. Azaria said that if elected, her objective would be to lower the price of preschool care for children under three years old, as well as adjusting parents’ vacation days to those of their children. Azaria is a religious woman, associated with the liberal Orthodox stream. She previously headed an organization helping women who were stranded without a divorce due to spousal refusal. She was also active in the social protest movement and protested against attempts to exclude women from the public arena.
In addition to Azaria, Kahlon has presented three other candidates: Michael Oren, former Israeli ambassador to the United States; Eli Elalouf, who headed an anti-poverty committee; and Yifat Shasha-Biton, an educator and former deputy mayor of Kiryat Shmona. Kahlon has not yet presented the name of a national female figure for his ticket. In the coming days he is expected to present the rest of his list, which he is obliged to complete by January 29.
Barak Ravid contributed to this report.
What is said during pre-election time may be false after election !!!
They gave up long ago Vichy! The french Flag is a flag of surrender in itself.
@ yamit82:
@ SHmuel HaLevi 2:
It is a well established fact that, French tanks have only two speeds:
Neutral and reverse
@ yamit82:
Why did they take that long? Cannot be due to lack of white flags…
Just heard France just surrendered to ISIS
ArnoldHarris Said:
He did shit in the economic sector other than allow free transfer without penalty from one company to another and allowed more companies to compete in the market … Good by themselves but that’s all and no other credit should be afforded him as there is nothing else. He made a populous decision that seems to have worked out most others won’t.
@ yamit82:
Wednesday, January 7, 2015
Peace Index Poll: Israeli Jews support annexation over independent Palestinian state 41.0%:43.1%
http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=65977
[Dr. Aaron Lerner – IMRA: This poll features several questions that require a tremendously dangerous leaps of faith: “appropriate security arrangements” I would strongly recommend that pollsters add a second question whenever they ask such a question: “do you believe that appropriate security arrangements exist”?]
The picture that emerges from the Peace Index survey conducted on December 29-31 (before the results of the Likud primaries were announced) indicates that the right remains the dominant political force among the Jewish public.
Who will set up the next government? About 60% of the Jewish public thinks the right-wing bloc has a better chance to establish the new government while only 24% believe the chances of the center-left bloc are better. When we asked which bloc the interviewees preferred to establish the next government, the gap had indeed narrowed a bit but the clear preference for the right remained: 55% preferred aright-wing government compared to 32.5% who preferred a center-left one. A comparison between the two questions shows that there are some who prefer a center-left government but still view right as having better chances.
@ bernard ross:
@ SHmuel HaLevi 2:
Peace Index Poll: Israeli Jews support annexation over independent Palestinian state 41.0%:4
http://www.peaceindex.org/indexMonthEng.aspx?num=287
What is the preferred solution to the problem with the Palestinians? In the Jewish public we found a balance between, on the one hand, the rate who think that even for a peace agreement worked out under U.S. sponsorship that would include appropriate security arrangements, not even part of the settlements in Judea and Samaria should be evacuated (48%), and on the other, the rate of those who disagree with that position (46.5%). A balance also emerges in the responses to the question of which possibility would better ensure the future of the country: annexation of the territories and the establishment of a single state under Israeli rule (41%) or a division of the land and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state beside Israel (43%). However, a majority of the Jewish public (56%) now opposes the idea that in the framework of a permanent peace settlement under U.S. sponsorship that would include appropriate security arrangements, rule over the Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem could be transferred to the Palestinians.
We wanted to know to what extent, in the Israeli public’s opinion, Israel should take into account the U.S. position on questions concerning a solution of the conflict with the Palestinians. About half of the Jewish public (50.5%) thinks Israel should not take it into account or should do so only a little. Conversely, 46% believe that the U.S. position should be taken into account to a great or a very great extent. In the Arab public, which apparently regards the United States as an actor that does not promote its interests, a majority (59%) thinks Israel should not take the Americans into account regarding its policy on the conflict. Given that most of the Jewish public prefers the right-wing bloc, the numerical balance between the supporters and opponents of a territorial compromise apparently indicates that some of the right’s supporters in fact prefer the two-state solution, but think the right can better represent Israel’s interests in permanent-status negotiations.
In the Arab public the rate of those who think the situation is at a standstill is in fact somewhat smaller than among the Jews (51%), but it is higher than the rate of those who think there is a chance of progress in the negotiations in the foreseeable future (39%).
The involvement of international actors:
A large majority of the Jewish public (70%) thinks the growing trend among European parliaments to call on their governments to officially recognize a Palestinian state before a peace agreement is reached damages Israel’s national interests. This figure indicates that even among supporters of a two-state solution, the majority does not think the initiative of these Europe parliaments is beneficial to Israel. This position is more widespread, as one would expect, among those identifying themselves as right-wing or in the center (74% in both camps), but even on the left the rate of those who think the European initiative harms Israel’s national interests (53%) is considerably higher than the rate of those who believe it contributes to those interests (28%).
Given all of the above, Kahlon may well be speaking from both sides of his mouth. Which I do not. Nevertheless, I think Kahlon’s public influence will grow, mostly because of what he has accomplished on behalf of Israel’s economic sector.
And if he is as pragmatic as I think of him, Kahlon will come to the logical conclusion that no peace with Fatah or Hamas ever shall be possible for Israel, and having arrived at such an obvious conclusion, he would then determine that it is Israel’s vital interest to annex all of Area C for strictly Jewish population build-up, thus breaking the grip of Fatah, and negotiating separate and strictly local municipal autonomy among the Arab hamulas predominant in the cities of Jenin, Tulkarem, Nablus, Kalkilya, Ramallah, Jericho and Hebron. And all of the above to be repeated in the Gaza strip.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
ArnoldHarris Said:
from april 30, 2011, but he has not re-mentioned it recently.. perhaps he does not want to scare away liberals or perhaps he has changed his mind?
Any peace proposals envision withdrawal over 5-10 years so BB can agree to that without actually withdrawing “at this time”.
ArnoldHarris Said:
Please show me a link to this, I seem to remember that at his announcement he was first talking about giving away land for peace?
Moshe Kahlon and his recently-formed Kulanu list for the upcoming Knesset election is shaping up as potentially the most interesting contender. And I have been impressed by the fact that Kahlon has called for immediate annexation of Area C with its growing Jewish population majority, plus the thoughtful ways that he has proven influential in inducing needed changes in the everyday Israeli marketplace, which has earned him a growing political following.
I think a combination of Kahlon’s and Bennett’s parties — sort of a right-wing and centrist example of what Labor and Lapid pulled off on the left — could command more Knesset seats than either Likud, Labor/Livni, or the newly-strengthened Jewish religious bloc of parties. If so, Bennett and Kahlon could in serve as the core of a new and solid government of Israel.
If any other Israpundit commenters more familiar with the Israeli political scene have any ideas contrary to those I have expressed here, I look forward to considering them.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
@ SHmuel HaLevi 2:
The court decision must be changed!
Great! Migron and Amona are slated by his government for destruction for no apparent reason. There are no claims by Islamic or other Arabs of that land being their property.
Lets see what will Mr. Netanyahu do….