The announcement today by Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman at the Knesset Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee, that the Trump administration warned Israel that imposing sovereignty over the West Bank would cause an “immediate crisis” between the U.S. and Israel, is spreading like wildfire.
Newsweek reported the warning pointed to “a red line for the Trump administration in its relationship with the Israeli government”:
“We received a direct message… imposing Israeli sovereignty [on the West Bank] would mean an immediate crisis with the new administration,” Lieberman told the Israeli parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. “The coalition should clearly state that there is no intention to impose [Israeli] sovereignty.”
The warning came after Likud KM Miki Zohar, who advocates annexation, stated on Israeli television Channel i24 last night that the two state solution was “dead” and Palestinians, while not having full citizenship, would nonetheless enjoy rights like every citizen, except for the right to vote for the Knesset — unless they serve in the army or to “serve the country” which he hastened to assure viewers they would not do.
Lieberman noted he’d been getting calls from “all of the world wanting to know if this is the position of the coalition,” continuing,
“[W]e need to separate from the Palestinians and not to integrate them. The decision to annex Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] would mean the integration of 2.7 million Palestinians in Israel.”
Rather confusing messaging from the Trump administration. Just last month Trump said he’d be “happy” with a one state solution “if Israel and the Palestinians are happy”. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley later walked that back, saying that the policy was still, two-state solution. Maybe Trump heard Palestinians are not happy. We may be hearing more on this latest development soon as Lieberman is due to meet with top U.S. administration officials this week in Washington.
Why doesn,t Nietandyahu demand an address of the full Congress so he can trump , Trump . It worked a treat with Obama so why not give Donald the finger, given that the Congress is in Israel,s pocket.Paul Ryan will jump to attention when given the order from his bosses in Tel Aviv.He might even arrange for another record breaking number of standing ovations and it will be a golden opportunity to unite the Congress , if only for a few hours.
If Israel wants to annex the West Bank , who the hell is Trump to get in the way. We all know , the Donald is a very restrained chappie and will not object to someone circumventing his authority.
US warning to Israel signals new backpedaling by Trump:
It’s so cute how Ms. Shaked assumes an air of bravado and then, in the same paragraph, undermines it. :-)
What will your
bananacherry-tomato republic do if the U.S. dog does not respond to the wag of the “Jewish State’s” tail, Ms. Shaked?As far I as I know, Trump is the first US President to draw a red line for Israel pre-emptively — that is, not as a reaction to an escalating crisis. He did this within the first 2 months of his first term. Of course, the obsequious Hillary Clinton would never have drawn any red lines for Israel. Same goes for Trump’s predecessors, the obsequious Obama, Bush junior, and Bill Clinton, whose records speak for themselves.
Some other rare exceptions where US Presidents have used the threat of punitive action against Israel:
* 1956 Suez Crisis – President Dwight Eisenhower threatened to cut off US aid to Israel and to take legislative action to block private aid by US citizens to Israel, if Israel did not return the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt.
* 1982 Suspension of Military Aid – President Ronald Reagan ordered a halt to the delivery of cluster bombs to Israel after Israel was found to have illegally used the weapons in its invasion of Lebanon.
* 1992 Delay of Loan Guarantees – President George H W Bush delayed the approval of $10 billion in loan guarantees until Israel promised to halt settlement expansion.
I don’t think we’ll ever know what Trump’s threat of “immediate crisis” entails, because Israel will probably no longer dare to annex any part of the West Bank. Although Trump has stated that he’s agnostic about what a future solution looks like (two-state or one-state), the proviso is that he’s happy with any solution “that both parties like”. That’s the key — if both parties agree on a one-state solution that’s fine, but if Israel unilaterally imposes a one-state solution through annexation, that’s a red line. Of course, Palestinians have the same chance of agreeing to an Israeli imposed one-state apartheid regime, as slaves have of agreeing to their own slavery.
Trump heard from his Middle East business partners (The people from the Muslim countries he didn’t ban from coming to the U.S.) that they would not be happy with “Greater Israel.”
So Trump is not going to help “Make Israel Great Again.”
My hunch is that the disingenuous prime minister prompted the U.S. administration to draw this red line. Netanyahu, who doesn’t want to rock the diplomatic boat, needs cover from Washington to fend off Naftali Bennett and the annexationists in his coalition. Netanyahu certainly understands the diplomatic cost of letting the mask slip to reveal the ugly face of apartheid.