Israel must take heed of its friends - William Hague was right to differ from Israel’s government over the expansion of settlements
Few countries are closer allies of Israel than Britain. The two are united not
only by their shared efforts to contain Iran’s nuclear programme, but by
shared values: Israel, unlike so many states in the Middle East, is a
rumbustious parliamentary democracy, where every point of view – from
Zionist nationalism to pan-Arab Baathism – finds its noisy place.
So when Britain differs from Israel’s leaders, we should do so only in the
spirit of candid friendship. And sadly, William Hague was right to differ
from Israel’s government on the vital question of the expansion of
settlements on occupied land.
It is true that Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, had good
reason to feel affronted by the Palestinian Authority’s successful bid for
upgraded status at the United Nations. Instead of helping to resolve the
Arab-Israeli conflict, this piece of political theatre risks creating yet
another obstacle to genuine peace talks. But the Israeli leader’s policy of
diplomatic and political retaliation could allow Israel’s opponents to
portray the country, unfairly, as permanently snarling, defensive and
aggrieved.
Mr Netanyahu may have been within his rights to withhold £75 million of tax
revenues from the Palestinian Authority, although that decision is bound to
weaken Mahmoud Abbas’s cash-strapped administration further by comparison
with Hamas. But he was completely wrong to undermine the chances of the
“two-state solution” by promising another 3,000 settler homes in the
occupied territories – and allowing planning to begin in the highly
sensitive area known as “E1”. Any construction on this vital strip of land
would sever the West Bank from East Jerusalem, thereby rendering a viable
Palestinian state almost impossible to achieve. To have withdrawn Britain’s
ambassador from Tel Aviv, as was briefly mooted, would have been a
gratuitous piece of grandstanding. But Mr Hague had to make clear how
frustrating it can be to be Israel’s friend these days.
In Mr Netanyahu’s defence, there is doubtless an element of electoral
posturing to his behaviour. He remains the only Israeli leader to have
imposed a settlement freeze – a partial 10-month moratorium in 2010 designed
to restart peace talks – and the only head of the Right-wing Likud party to
have endorsed the case for a Palestinian state. Having taken those
courageous steps, he should follow the logic of his position. A peace
settlement would give Israel recognised frontiers and allow the country to
divest itself of four million Palestinians, guaranteeing its future as a
democracy with a Jewish majority. Mr Netanyahu should be prepared to realise
this vision.
Read the original article here.
Read the original article here.
Comments
Post a Comment
Thanks for leaving comments. You are making this discussion richer and more beneficial to everyone. Do not hold back.