Here is an interesting rumor to add to the murky mix of reports surrounding the Obama-Netanyahu confrontation.
According to Ron Kampeas of JTA, the widely reported story that the new Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren was summoned by State Department officials and told that the his government must halt its announced plans to build Jewish housing in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem is untrue. Kampeas claims that the reports were the result of an Israeli government disinformation leak whose purpose was to shift the settlement debate from the West Bank to Jerusalem. The Jerusalem Post also mentions that the reported showdown never occurred. Neither the Israelis nor the Americans have confirmed or denied this.
Ten days ago, following the reports of the Oren meeting, Prime Minister Netanyahu made a number of provocative statements at a cabinet session, which, although they did not directly address the purported State Department meeting with the Israeli ambassador, bluntly stated his intention to continue to expand the Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem in defiance of Obama’s previous requests.
Kampeas, who readers of this site may know is a settler himself, claimed that the Israelis planted the story about Oren and the State Department so Netanyahu could focus the settlement freeze debate on a construction project in East Jerusalem. It may be advantageous for the Israelis to center discussion on construction in and around Jerusalem, which has greater support among Israelis and possibly among American Jews, than in other area under occupation. According to Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler on IPS, "shifting the argument from the West Bank to Jerusalem was precisely what Netanyahu was looking for."
After his remarks at the cabinet meeting on Sunday, Netanyahu raised the ante when he mentioned the purported State Department showdown, and then challenged the Americans to stop him from going forward with construction in East Jerusalem. Speaking with government officials later in the day, Netanyahu expanded on the tone if not the substance of his earlier remarks to the cabinet:
In my previous term, I built thousands of apartments in the Har Homa neighborhood of Jerusalem, defying the entire world. Therefore, it is clear that I will not capitulate in this case – especially when we are talking about a mere 20 apartments.
Kampeas assumes Netanyahu’s public declarations of unwillingness to accede to the complete settlement freeze is just posturing in negotiations with the U.S., which both sides understand will lead to a compromise on the issue. Previously, both Secretary of State Clinton and Special Envoy Mitchell have referred to the ungoing increasingly acrimonious disagreement over settlement construction as a "negotiation."
As long as Obama and Mitchell insist on a complete freeze on settlement expansion, they are acting appropriately as a trial judge might issue a cease and desist order for a disputed action which is scheduled for adjudication. (See Helena Cobban, here.) But if the U.S. compromises and negotiates where and under what circumstances the Israelis will be permitted to build in the territories, they would then be acting inappropriately as representatives of the Palestinian people without seeking their advice or consent.
The bottom line is that building settlements in occupied territory is illegal and is an impediment to peace. The existence of the settlements is much of the problem, and increasing them increases the problem. How many times have we heard this same argument? How many world leaders and international organizations have supported the Obama demand for a complete freeze in the last weeks? Isn’t it the time to tell the Israelis, No?
The question now is: Can Netanyahu defy the entire world today as he did over a decade ago when he built the Jewish settlement on Jabal Abu Ghneim which the Israel’s call Har Homa?
